tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post4882843622454958418..comments2024-01-23T07:34:52.253-08:00Comments on Copyrights & Campaigns: Department of Justice defends constitutionality of $675,000 award against Tenenbaum; p2p user caused 'great public harm'Ben Sheffnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-27465672903609932522010-01-29T12:46:19.103-08:002010-01-29T12:46:19.103-08:00Watching US citizens in contortions over this give...Watching US citizens in contortions over this gives non-unitedstatesians some delicious schadenfreude. <br /><br />On the one hand there's no doubt your founding fathers, Jefferson for example, would have been horrified at the extension of the very limited notions of copyright and patent to the lengths they have reached today. <br /><br />On the other hand the constitution IP clause allows for reasonable extension of powers and what congress proposes as reasonable, SCOTUS is disposed to accept. <br /><br />On the gripping hand, this will criminalize close to the entire population. The heaving masses will take their revenge at the polls, sooner or later. One is reminded of the Volstead act and its aftermath. <br /><br />Besides, if studies on the actual effect of IP laws are remotely correct, in short order US competitive power will be crippled; either way, the outcome will be the best show in town.Terry Colenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-44449667663534562772010-01-22T16:12:33.203-08:002010-01-22T16:12:33.203-08:00"Let's face it through, if it weren't..."Let's face it through, if it weren't for the plethora of infringing copies of Daily Shows and South Parks, nobody would ever have known what YouTube was"<br /><br />Lol wut? Nobody watches that nonsense. There is much better nonsense to watch on Youtube.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-28310172884401029542010-01-21T12:10:22.891-08:002010-01-21T12:10:22.891-08:00It is far from clear that Tenenbaum's debt wou...It is far from clear that Tenenbaum's debt would be dischargeable in bankruptcy, given the jury's finding that his infringement was willful. Here's some background on that issue:<br /><br />http://sstlr.syr.edu/index.php/2009/05/13/copyright-infringement-and-bankruptcy-the-meaning-of-willful-in-two-statutory-schemes/<br /><br />http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10269251-93.htmlBen Sheffnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-27202096840477656552010-01-21T12:04:55.763-08:002010-01-21T12:04:55.763-08:00What about the whole bankruptcy thing to avoid pay...What about the whole bankruptcy thing to avoid payment of a civil penalty? Does that happen before bankruptcy or does a judge tell the defendant they can't apply for bankruptcy (for the civil penalty)?<br /><br />Nice use of the word cesspool in the comment above.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-36750898744941723782010-01-21T00:55:22.117-08:002010-01-21T00:55:22.117-08:00This DoJ brief was an absolute pleasure to read. ...This DoJ brief was an absolute pleasure to read. You want to know how I know this brief will win the day? Because it has Beckerman throwing a fit over on his website. And whenever he gets outraged by a legal argument, it always turns out to be right.<br /><br />As for Youtube, I'm eagerly anticipating the outcome. I think Viacom and the others have a very strong case against safe harbor, but it will be interesting to see if a Judge has the fortitude to enjoin the country's most popular website. Let's face it through, if it weren't for the plethora of infringing copies of Daily Shows and South Parks, nobody would ever have known what YouTube was. And today, it is still a cesspool of infringement with no means of controlling the uploaders and repeat offenders. I don't know where the happy medium lies, but in a decision between placing the onus on the copyright holder to make daily searches of every video host on the internet for their entire catalog of works, or to place the onus on the host who is providing the incentive to continue infringing, I choose the latter.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-15614228156410023622010-01-20T18:29:16.645-08:002010-01-20T18:29:16.645-08:00@Anonymous:
YouTube claims that it's protecte...@Anonymous:<br /><br />YouTube claims that it's protected by the DMCA's safe harbor for sites that promptly remove videos upon receipt of infringement notices. But Viacom and others don't believe the safe harbor applies, and are fighting a massive lawsuit on the subject: http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv02103/302164/Ben Sheffnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-36104300363025740462010-01-20T18:27:08.791-08:002010-01-20T18:27:08.791-08:00I am trying to figure out why Google's Youtube...I am trying to figure out why Google's Youtube continues to operate with impunity?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-91727591102509645242010-01-20T12:10:25.086-08:002010-01-20T12:10:25.086-08:00If Joel's actions caused "great public ha...If Joel's actions caused "great public harm", you would think that they could at least *try* to put a dollar figure on it.<br /><br />I know it's not their responibility and specifically not required, but for all their dramatics, I think they should.<br /><br />If they could show me how much they were actually hurt, then I might be persuaded to change sides.<br /><br />As it stands, they look like greedy bullies and Joel is the victim.<br /><br />RandyRandyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02041892308592857971noreply@blogger.com