Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerco
So, why are there not law firms jumping all over this? The biggest problem for most little guys is there is no way we can fight, be it time or money. From other threads it's shown that with time and money, great profit can actually be made going after these guys. I'm really surprised that none of the adult friendly legal firms have stepped up to provide a service directly related to this. Say, a 50/50 split of any moneys received after expenses or something. I would think that even for starting out lawyers, this would be far better than simple ambulance chasing and be able to provide a steady income.
I've posted on it in the past. the solution here is to go after the USERS uploading the content directly. You take out those users, going after them publicly and harshly and the sites they upload to will go down with them.
Once something like this matures, it really would only be a matter of time till this issue was seriously nipped in the butt.
|
did you not read the previous posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wootpr0n
Actually, they never got in trouble for Usenet.
They got sanctioned by the judge for destroying all of the evidence (wiping all of the hard drives on computers, servers) and sending many of their employees on an all-expenses-paid trip so that they wouldn't be able to testify.
These hard drives + the employees may have had evidence that the company was aware of the infringing activity taking place and chose to do nothing. This is a situation where the DMCA safe harbor provision will not protect you.
The RIAA asked the judge to terminate the case, and rule in their favor. But the judge decided not to grant that request. Instead, he said that Usenet wouldn't be allowed to assert a specific defense (that they were protected by the DMCA safe harbor provision), because they destroyed the evidence that could potentially been used to refute that defense.
|
there is no weakening of the safe harbor provision, it a special case where they destroyed any potential proof that the safe harbor provision doesn't apply and the judge ruling you can destroy potentially incriminating evidence and use an affirmative defence at the same time. There has been similar case law around for years.
it like you can't claim self defence if scrub down all the blood evidence at the murder scene destroy the murder weapon and melt the body with acid.