I'm baffled why none of the defense teams in any of these cases ever dig into the actual facts and make the record companies prove actual damages. They know what songs were downloaded; they could research the sales figures, and make them show that after the date the song was downloaded, what the effect on sales was. Statutory damages are meant to be levied when actual damages are difficult to prove, but I would think someone, somewhere would try to tie the damages to some semblance of reality.
"...Essentially, this ruling would be a gut job on copyright, as it would first shift the burden in fair use cases. It would make fair use the default, and require the plaintiff to show that the use isn't fair. It would require the showing that the use specifically hurt creativity. That is not what the copyright laws require at all ..."
Wrong and Wronger.
That is exactly what copyright law was originally intended to do. Fair use IS the default. Copyright is a restriction of free speech for the purpose of granting a commercial monopoly. You absolutely, positively SHOULD have to prove some harm and damage before you are able to inhibit free speech. "Innocent until proven guilty" is still a core concept in the rule of law, regardless of what copyright maximalists would like.
Off topic, but Nina's quilts are lovely works of art.
On topic, this a great story about how a creative person can support themselves and continue doing what they love.
Sure, as long as he ALSO pays. They don't really care how you get the content, as long as you support the record companies, CD makers, the RIAA etc. etc.
But the bogus lawsuits, the fact that "Academic Advantage Scam" is the FIRST auto-complete suggestion, and the renewed interest and publicity for the SCAM association are an absolute BOON to our client, and money well spent.
Both of those attacks could be considered successful because the attacker got on the plane with an incendiary device and could have done damage. I was mainly referencing other terror plots (not just aircraft bombing) that have been prevented by intelligence gathering and going after actual criminal and terror suspects. No determined terrorist is going to be deterred by pat downs, x-rays, or any other ridiculous measure they come up with.
None. The answer is "none." They have never caught anyone and they never will. The only terror plots that were ever foiled, were done in by police work and intelligence gathering. If we took one tenth of the money we spend on dick-measuring machines and having mouth-breathers groping children, and spent it on actual intelligence, I think we would find a multitude of terror attacks being planned right now. Attacks that we don't know about, that may cause deaths, and won't be stopped by making Aunt Edna take off her corrective shoes and submit to invasive groping.
I look at this as the upside to current inertia in the Senate. Since nothing is getting done, the bad bills are obstructed just the same as any good ones.
Already gone ..
That headline is Sofa King good!
Maybe ..
Maybe they're just setting up all their supporters to be sued for infringement for using their copyrighted form letter.
"Reality has a well-know Liberal bias." - Colbert
I'm baffled ..
I'm baffled why none of the defense teams in any of these cases ever dig into the actual facts and make the record companies prove actual damages. They know what songs were downloaded; they could research the sales figures, and make them show that after the date the song was downloaded, what the effect on sales was. Statutory damages are meant to be levied when actual damages are difficult to prove, but I would think someone, somewhere would try to tie the damages to some semblance of reality.
Re: Re: Re:
"...Essentially, this ruling would be a gut job on copyright, as it would first shift the burden in fair use cases. It would make fair use the default, and require the plaintiff to show that the use isn't fair. It would require the showing that the use specifically hurt creativity. That is not what the copyright laws require at all ..."
Wrong and Wronger.
That is exactly what copyright law was originally intended to do. Fair use IS the default. Copyright is a restriction of free speech for the purpose of granting a commercial monopoly. You absolutely, positively SHOULD have to prove some harm and damage before you are able to inhibit free speech. "Innocent until proven guilty" is still a core concept in the rule of law, regardless of what copyright maximalists would like.
This is just sheer stupidity, and is revealing what kinds of boobs and asses these people are. They can't possibly support their position.
Off topic, but Nina's quilts are lovely works of art.
On topic, this a great story about how a creative person can support themselves and continue doing what they love.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sure, as long as he ALSO pays. They don't really care how you get the content, as long as you support the record companies, CD makers, the RIAA etc. etc.
Seriously?
This guy should be arrested just on the basis of his stupidity.
Re: Great idea!
WARNING: Excessive political grandstanding has been linked to wasted time and resources, and may result in the inability to lead and govern.
Why stop at just the one video?
I say we all pitch in and help get all performances of this song removed from everywhere.
"... significant and possibly irrevocable damage."
But the bogus lawsuits, the fact that "Academic Advantage Scam" is the FIRST auto-complete suggestion, and the renewed interest and publicity for the SCAM association are an absolute BOON to our client, and money well spent.
Typo Win!
"Immigration and Customer Enforcement" LOL!!!!!1
Re: Re: Re: Just wondering..
Both of those attacks could be considered successful because the attacker got on the plane with an incendiary device and could have done damage. I was mainly referencing other terror plots (not just aircraft bombing) that have been prevented by intelligence gathering and going after actual criminal and terror suspects. No determined terrorist is going to be deterred by pat downs, x-rays, or any other ridiculous measure they come up with.
Re: Just wondering..
None. The answer is "none." They have never caught anyone and they never will. The only terror plots that were ever foiled, were done in by police work and intelligence gathering. If we took one tenth of the money we spend on dick-measuring machines and having mouth-breathers groping children, and spent it on actual intelligence, I think we would find a multitude of terror attacks being planned right now. Attacks that we don't know about, that may cause deaths, and won't be stopped by making Aunt Edna take off her corrective shoes and submit to invasive groping.
One small lawsuit for man,
One giant leap backward for mankind.
Silver Lining
I look at this as the upside to current inertia in the Senate. Since nothing is getting done, the bad bills are obstructed just the same as any good ones.
Re: GET A LIFE
I really, really, really hope that was satire.
How long until state AG's start to gang up on 4chan?