Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
you need to get a dictionary and look up the definition of direct vs indirect.
hotfile provides a service that fileshare BOTH infringing and non infringing.
they make money from providing faster downloads to BOTH content sources
they can't tell the difference until AFTER the DMCA takedown is sent to them(couold be licienced, fair use, someone who has a right to uploading it)
there are more than 1/2 dozen including the viacomm vs youtube that make that distinction(hell in the viacomm case they actually had emails from one owner bitching out another owner for uploading copyrighted material and they still lost)
|
What a crock (as usual for you). Even if their they hosted a substantial number of non-infringing works, the fact that the DMCA disallows safe harbor because they 1) directly profit from the activity by selling memberships and 2) directly encourage uploading infringing works by paying uploaders to do it. A litigant need only prove a single case of infringement, for which the DMCA would not protect them, and punitive damages can be tens of thousands, and more.
But it's not like that. They have THOUSANDS of infringing works, none of which are provided safe harbor. They have selected a business model that the DMCA specifically does not protect, and this action is the first in many against these kinds of file hosts.
Here's what can be determined in discovery alone:
* The names, mailing addresses, and other personal information of any uploader of infringing material (Hotfile must maintain it, so they can pay these people).
* The IPs of downloaders of the infringing material.
* The names and billing information of those downloaders of the infringing material who have paid a membership fee
* Access to accounting and revenue information, to ascertain real and punitive damages.
I wouldn't want to be a paid Hotfile uploader or member right about now. The MPAA is about to go after you.