james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica | reply to Millenniumle
Re: If they don't have to follow the rules, then I why should I?
Too bad all the file sharing is free publicity for their clients. You know, publicity, like they used to PAY for, before they decided that the radio stations were pirates? |
|
Millenniumle
join:2007-11-11
Fredonia, NY
2 edits | reply to Dogfather
Perhaps I misunderstand the history, but a judge in another case found that "making available without profit" is not a violation of copyright law. The judge in this case reopened it to argument for retrial because he instructed the jury that they could find that the material was "made available." So the context that I understand is they don't want to have to provide evidence of copying. They feel that making available alone should be criminal and providing evidence of making available should suffice.
As much as I dislike both of the AA's and couldn't care less about P2P, I agree with them that the law is inadequate for two reasons. The copyrighted material is being shared (duh!) - contrary to copyright. They now have virtually no means of enforcing their copyrights over P2P.
The AA's aren't going to give up. Legislation is either going to change or we are all going to be paying for violators through charges at the ISP bounced back to the AA's. Personally, I hope the legislation gets changed and the AA's have a field day in civil courts. Having civil means of recourse weakens their argument for an ISP tax. Without it, they have the best argument in the world. |
|
