Quote:
Originally Posted by MaDalton
where have i said they should go after every free file locker?
they should go after those that support copyright infringing - for example through upload reward programs or not following DMCA notes
if you are a file locker and follow the laws to the letter you have nothing to be afraid of
and regarding losing their stuff: if you trust crooks with your valuable files it's your problem. it's the same as investing in the wrong company or putting your money on the wrong bank.
that's life
|
that a circular proof,
what happens if like youtube they win this fight
What happens just like youtube the damaging "evidence" is actually one half of a conversation where the fair use/ suspect nature of the infringing activities was being discussed.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...om-filings.ars
look at the complaint again, and compare the "smoking gun" to those in the youtube case.
Now imagine that every single one has the exact same contextual misrepresentation and tell me what left.
That actually what your supposed to do (innocent until proven guilty)
remember in the youtube case every single one of those damages emails were really in the context of a conversation that recognized that all copyright material was NOT automatically infringing. That fair use validated a lot of uploads. That the only way to protect both free speech and copyright was to simply obey the take down request that ACTUALLY came in and nothing more.
btw affiliate programs are not a problem, youtube case proves that they paid up loaders based on the views of their uploads too. Arguing that just because they have a rewards program doesn't mean it wrong. There is a legit reason to have, if a documentarian, an independent singer want to give their content away for free for the pay day of the rewards program they should have a right to do so (even if the content is derived but covered by the fair use exemptions -- commentary, parody, etc).