David Gerard wrote:
On 28/01/07, Jeff V. Merkey
Yeah? How many of you have actually had to stand
in front of a judge
with millions of dollars of **YOUR**
money on the line. I have stood there more times than I care to mention,
and in most cases not by my own choice.
Judges will not listen to whining exusces and weak arguments, and you
don't get to argue over and over again
after they rule -- you have to pay. The real shocker is when the judge
orders you to pay
the other sides legal fees. What if they hire Coudert Brothers from new
York to defend them who charges $500.00/hour
and they rack up 350,000.00 in fees just to send a dozen letters and
file a complaint and you get ordered to pay it.
In the example I mentioned, it may be worth mentioning the Church of
Scientology has had to pay the attorney's fees for the people they
sued many a time.
It can go the other way -- depends on who wins. In a case where we are
using someones copyrighted images and
they were posted by a n anonymous editor, I woud dare to guess we may
not alays be on the winning side ...
Cheaper to take down the content.
I suspect in a clear-cut case, you'd be surprised how many friends
Not that I consider it a good idea to push it, of course.
We should act in good faith always. Good faith means if someone creates
a "cloud of doubt" and they are
an undisputed owner of the materials in question, a good faith action
would be to remove it.
" your honor, we always strive to act in good faith in all situations,
and in the present case, we were notified
the materials may have been copyrighted and removed them immediately IAW
with our policies. Given our
actions in good faith, we cannot be held liable as the other side claims
since we are simply a third party
interactive web service and we have complied with the DMCA at all times ..."
foundation-l mailing list