On the other hand, "Repo Man" wouldn't be the same movie at all without every single product in it being overtly generic in a finger-up to the insanity. [Emoticon]
I've been telling folks that January 18, 2012 is an historical date. They look at me like I'm insane (mostly because the media behind all this ignored or muddied the reporting - not one word about it on Jan. 18 on NBC). We'll see who has the last laugh. Muahhahahah.
I've used CafePress for over a decade. Never had any issue with them. (And come to think of it, I totally didn't have the rights to that Mussolini photo for my "One Person Can Make a Difference" series.)
My point. And if they don't register within three months of publication or in any event before infringement, then no statutory damages are available. They are only entitled to the actual damages.
I haven't seen much discussion on whether these trolls were actually registering their copyrights within the window to even be entitled to statutory damages. I recall one of the trolls ("Far Cry" perhaps?) had a pretty sketchy registration/publication date issue. But being trolls, it was all about the threat and the settlement, accompanied with misrepresentations about how liable the victims would be. So the cases tended not to get to the point in litigation where defendants could assert statutory damages weren't even available.
"The process is tilted in a way that allows ISPs to be a shield for illegal activity, which is unfair to the plaintiffs."
This assumes that the plaintiffs were actually harmed by the alleged piracy. So this defendant pirated your porn, lame or even incredible film. It's not necessarily a $4.99 rental loss, or even a $9.99 purchase loss. It might have even led to additional sales. That's what this site is all about.
In most areas of law, you're entitled to your actual damages, which would be that $10, maybe. Not thousands. In the real world, that's a business expense, like the assumed rate of shoplifting at your local drugstore.
It also assumes the plaintiffs get the right person, which IP addresses often do not do.
This is the sort of ruling that is very likely to get overturned ...
He attempts to deny the plaintiff all the normal mechanisms that are a part of every other civil litigation.
Generally can't appeal a discretionary discovery ruling, and if so, the Judge is granted the widest latitude for the discretionary call.
Judge didn't deny plaintiff normal mechanisms at all, which are: find and serve the defendant, then do discovery. They were asking for relief that can only be granted on a showing of good cause, which trolls can't show.
Simply put, they're free to sue 'em individually, find 'em and serve 'em through investigation like everyone else. But here they don't get to use legal process to facilitate their shakedown.
Hurrah! The word is out! Perhaps they discuss it on the Fed Judge Google Group or something. The worm does indeed appear to have turned (whatever that means).
... not to mention that it has been illegal to threaten violence online since before there was an "online" with which to threaten people. (18 USC 875 - threats in interstate commerce [just try to send an email without it crossing a state line]; http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/41/875)
Usually requires that the person's image was used without consent, for commercial purposes. My understanding was the main post of the video was at his direction. Dead.
Yeah he just needs to retain Steve Gibson as his counsel to argue his case.
But if it all went south, Steve Gibson as counsel would ultimately just claim all his efforts to contact himself are going without response, so since he has "disappeared" his client should not have to comply with any adverse court orders.
This sounds a bit like it might have been Mike Keneally. Keneally has his own solo projects, his own bands, and tours with Satriani; sits in on keys for Chickenfoot; does studio work (and is generally a super nice guy).
And notably, per the TechDirt model, he does living-room concerts for fans, sells product directly with regular deals, and his recording policy is: feel free to record and shoot shows and share them -- just send him a copy.
I've been wondering why Keneally hasn't shown up in these pages. He's the epitome of the CwF + RtB model.
On the post: Louis Vuitton Touts Basketball Trademark Victory In Similar Lawsuit Against Warner Bros.
Re:
On the post: Historic Archive Of Websites From The January 18th SOPA Blackout
Re: Re: Awesome!
On the post: Historic Archive Of Websites From The January 18th SOPA Blackout
Awesome!
On the post: Zazzle Blocks '1-Star Review' Mug, Gets Even Worse Review From Instapaper Creator
Re:
On the post: No, Violating Your Employer's Computer Use Policy Is Not Criminal Hacking
Lovely ...
On the post: Yet Another Copyright Troll Case Kicked Out Of Court, With Excellent Reasoning From The Judge
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I haven't seen much discussion on whether these trolls were actually registering their copyrights within the window to even be entitled to statutory damages. I recall one of the trolls ("Far Cry" perhaps?) had a pretty sketchy registration/publication date issue. But being trolls, it was all about the threat and the settlement, accompanied with misrepresentations about how liable the victims would be. So the cases tended not to get to the point in litigation where defendants could assert statutory damages weren't even available.
On the post: Yet Another Copyright Troll Case Kicked Out Of Court, With Excellent Reasoning From The Judge
Re: Re: Re:
This assumes that the plaintiffs were actually harmed by the alleged piracy. So this defendant pirated your porn, lame or even incredible film. It's not necessarily a $4.99 rental loss, or even a $9.99 purchase loss. It might have even led to additional sales. That's what this site is all about.
In most areas of law, you're entitled to your actual damages, which would be that $10, maybe. Not thousands. In the real world, that's a business expense, like the assumed rate of shoplifting at your local drugstore.
It also assumes the plaintiffs get the right person, which IP addresses often do not do.
On the post: Yet Another Copyright Troll Case Kicked Out Of Court, With Excellent Reasoning From The Judge
Re:
He attempts to deny the plaintiff all the normal mechanisms that are a part of every other civil litigation.
Generally can't appeal a discretionary discovery ruling, and if so, the Judge is granted the widest latitude for the discretionary call.
Judge didn't deny plaintiff normal mechanisms at all, which are: find and serve the defendant, then do discovery. They were asking for relief that can only be granted on a showing of good cause, which trolls can't show.
Simply put, they're free to sue 'em individually, find 'em and serve 'em through investigation like everyone else. But here they don't get to use legal process to facilitate their shakedown.
On the post: Yet Another Copyright Troll Case Kicked Out Of Court, With Excellent Reasoning From The Judge
Re:
On the post: Yet Another Copyright Troll Case Kicked Out Of Court, With Excellent Reasoning From The Judge
On the post: Arizona Politicians Scramble To Adjust Internet Censorship Bill After The Internet Mocks Them For Being Clueless
...
On the post: Twitter's Lawsuits Against Spam Tool Providers Could Easily Backfire
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Twitter's Lawsuits Against Spam Tool Providers Could Easily Backfire
Re:
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Quoth Cosmo ...
On the post: Bohemian Rhapsody Video Taken Down Again, This Time By The Drunk Guy Himself
Re:
On the post: Easy Come, Easy Go: EMI Pulls Video Of Drunk Guy Singing Bohemian Rhapsody, Reinstates It After Backlash
Since when does DMCA have a "Disrespectful" Element?
“It seems like a mistake has been made,” said Dylan Jones, a spokesman with EMI in New York.
He said the company often requests videos be pulled from the site if they are “disrespectful,” but it did not in this case.
Er, huh? What? Let's hope that was just the writer's error, 'cause otherwise ...
On the post: Judge Smacks Down Lawsuit From HuffPo Volunteers, Says 'They Got What They Paid For'
Re: Re:
But if it all went south, Steve Gibson as counsel would ultimately just claim all his efforts to contact himself are going without response, so since he has "disappeared" his client should not have to comply with any adverse court orders.
On the post: How The RIAA & MPAA Are Like The Anti-Innovation German Weavers' Guild Of The 16th Century
Re: Re: Can't we just get the dot-Music top level domain already?
On the post: Case Study On How An Indie-Rock Composer Musician Makes Money
Keneally perhaps?
And notably, per the TechDirt model, he does living-room concerts for fans, sells product directly with regular deals, and his recording policy is: feel free to record and shoot shows and share them -- just send him a copy.
I've been wondering why Keneally hasn't shown up in these pages. He's the epitome of the CwF + RtB model.
On the post: SoundExchange & A2IM Sued For Antitrust Violations By Sirius
Next >>