In a message dated 6/30/2010 5:36:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk writes:
> If a way of halting the gross infringements can't be done. Then go back
> to hitting the seeders with $22,000 fines per infringed work. The
> economic costs of simply walking away and not stopping the piracy are
> too much.>>
The seeders.... you mean the people who actually load the material to the
net?
If so, no one is stopping the copyright *owners* from filing lawsuits
against Jane Doe.
So exactly what damage are you trying to contain here?
They know perfectly well how to do it, they've been doing it.
If you can't actually get 85 million dollars out of a 13-year-old girl,
well then that's your tough luck, welcome to jurisprudence U.S. style.
And if after you keep attacking housewives and children, your image is
horrible, well that's your tough luck as well.
If people hate you because you're trying to protect a work on which you
haven't *actually* made any income in thirty-five years.... that's your tough
luck.
I shouldn't use the work "luck" however in this case, since it implies you
didn't bring it upon yourself.
How about this counter-offensive. Threaten to repeal copyright to the
point, where any holder *only* gets ten years. That's it.
Ten years to make your money then it's public domain. We can call it the
"Knock it off or else" proposal.
Will "Tough Love" Johnson