Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Let me see...
Gideon "pussyserver" Gallery draws all of his conclusions from an old case involving vcr's and applies it to the internet.
Then Gideon "totally delusional" Gallery tells Michael Fattorosi (an actual attorney) that he is all wrong for drawing his conclusions from a case INVOLVING THE ACTUAL INTERNET
Insane loner living in his parents basement using a decades old ruling that was before the internet existed VS Respected attorney at law showing a new precedent involving the internet.
Only in the completely insane world of GideonGallery does this make any sense at all.
I warned you gideon...you're playhouse is going to tumble. There is a very good reason that no company with any credibility will buy into any of your "theories" on marketing.
1. They don't work
2. The whole foundation for it is about to become illegal.
|
so a lawyer who claims
Quote:
Originally Posted by pornlaw
Let's talk...I leave for Italy on Monday for 3 weeks but I will be available until then. I think you have my cell number.
What I am saying is that you can go around DMCA and start giving notice to pirate sites where the content is and if they do not take it down you can hit them with a contributory trademark infringement suit instead of a DMCA takedown notice.
|
using a case where the host actually ignored takedown request as a bases for that arguement.
And doesn't have the common sense to realize that maybe the reason that safe harbor didn't apply was because they didn't meet the requirements for it to apply should be respected.
I understand an idiot who believes copying waynes world in porn is creative could make such a mistake, but good lawyer wouldn't.
btw the RDVR case was like 2 months ago.
so it wasn't me that apply the vcr case to the internet it was the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.