Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
When are you going to get it through your very thick head that legal precedent has been set time and time again. If you want to go and find them do a search on Google for Copyright violations and convictions. You have to be clutching at straws here.
|
Paul you keep trumpeting those lossses here whenever you can
i am fully aware of most of the losses you keep talking about, when they were bogus i railed against them.
The point is so far i am 3/3 now , each time i said the ruling was wrong it has been. While each time you trumped it as the right thing you have been wrong because it has been reversed by a higher court.
A large number of the convictions you keep talking about are really just wins because the RIAA as deeper pockets, and simply outspent the defendants.
This ruling changes all that, because it create a monetary payment methology for lawyers who want to defend such fair uses. Lawyers will simply defend the fair use users of copyright, in court racking up their billable hours.(you only pay if we win) They will then sue for those court cost. Use your deep pockets to target a small guy to get a settlement and it just going to be used against you in the long run.
Quote:
|
Fair use is fine and no one complains about fair use of our products. Someone putting up a site and using stolen content is not fair use. When are you going to get that into your thick head?
|
of course you are, you are complaining about tube sites access shifting your content, your complaining about torrent sites timeshifting/backing up/recovering your content. Whenever you want to complain about fair use, you start the siren song again "that not fair use".
the problem is that only way you can make such a statement is to ignore the precedents set by "old" case like the betamax case. The problem is you have to pretend that case is not still referenced today (august 12, 2008) to extend those same rights to newer technologies (like the cloud).