13 items | 8 visits
The Show Notes for Episode 107 of the Copyright 2.0 Show!
Updated on Apr 17, 09
Created on Apr 17, 09
Category: Others
URL:
Jonathan Bailey's List: Episode 107
-
-
Yesterday, Spanish Criminal Court No.1 made its decision in the case of file-sharing site infopsp.com. According to the complainants - Spanish Association of Publishers and Distributors Entertainment Software (ADESE) and the Spanish Videographic Union (UVE) - the site, which had around 17,300 members, operated illegally.
-
The big question now is how a court would view donations given to torrent sites. We’ve already seen the police in the UK call voluntary donations “subscriptions” in the OiNK case. Time will tell how a Spanish court will view them.
-
-
-
The new file sharing law is based on the European Union's Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) and allows courts to order internet operators to hand over details that identify suspected illegal file sharers.
As such, the law enables Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to retain the IP addresses of file sharers. But ISPs also remain at liberty to destroy information about their users if they so wish.
-
-
-
UK laws that make it a copyright violation to copy a CD that you own onto a computer or iPod should be changed, says Consumer Focus.
-
The survey by Consumers International looked at intellectual property laws and enforcement practices in 16 countries - Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Israel, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, the UK and the US.
-
-
-
The process was begun by the US and Japan in 2006 but negotiations now include Australia, Canada, the European Commission and the EU's 27 member states, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, South Korea, Singapore and Switzerland.
-
-
-
The Appellate Court's opinion today said, "Here, we think that the limits of the district judge's discretion were exceeded; her interpretation of Local Rule 83.3 is unprecedented and, in our view, palpably incorrect."
-
-
-
The court ruled that the MPAA did not technically intercept them under the WireTap Act, although jurisprudence would suggest otherwise. TorrentSpy owner Justin Bunnel told TorrentFreak that he has filed a brief at the Court of Appeals and that the MPAA is expected to do the same in the near future. From then on it can take up to a year before the appeal is heard in court.
-
The Pirate Bay, who were also the target of MPAA spying activities, have not taken any action. Instead, spokesman Peter Sunde laughed it away. “I think it’s amazingly funny if the MPAA bought information like that, expensively, and against the US law. Only proves their stupidity and that they have no case,” he told TorrentFreak earlier.
-
-
-
Combs never raised fair use as a defense. Why? Athony Falzone at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society suggested, at the time of the case’s appeal, that the tactic may have been based on a reluctance to risk encouraging fair use as a defense in sampling suits:
-
On appeal, the Sixth Circuit found that Westbound’s punitive damages award was unconstitutionally excessive and violated due process. The Circuit remanded with instructions to remit the amount of the punitive damages “closer to” a 1:1 or 2:1 ratio to the compensatory damages.
-
-
-
As you may already know, Amazon's electronic reader, the Kindle (and newer Kindle 2) is linked to the owner's Amazon account where the inventory of purchased books is managed. In addition, although there are a few other sources, it is primarily the only way to buy books for the device. When this user's Amazon account was closed, he also lost access to all the books he had purchased, as well as the ability to shop for new material.
-
Ultimately, the user appealed to Amazon and it reinstated his account noting that "if a higher-than-acceptable number of concession incidents occur in the future" they will ban him again. Although this particular incident worked out for the user, it is still a bit frightening that a company can unilaterally make such a decision. Of course, it would be technically possible for Amazon to allow banned users to continue accessing their Kindle accounts, but they chose not to go that route and, based on its user agreement, Amazon doesn't have to.
-
-
-
He also created a sham trust, transferring his personal funds into the account and using it to pay his everyday expenses. In 2002, Mr. Ealy notified the IRS that his name had been copyrighted and that if the IRS used his name for any purpose, the IRS would be subject to a $500,000 fee.
-
1 - 13 of 13
20 items/page
List Comments
(0)
List Info