Quote:
Originally posted by Rick Latona
There are times when a fan will submit a piece of content where we are unaware that it is owned and licensed to someone in the business. When this happens we will take it down or link to the person's site of their choice with the linking code of their choice. In our business all we can do is use our best judgement and handle each situation as they arrise. Almost everyone on this board knows that we do everything we can to avoid posting owned content without giving credit and traffic.
|
I will just address this part.
First, that is NOT how you have always operated. In the beginning, you used a lot of content that you had no legal rights to use.
Secondly, to this part of your operation, I say bullshit.
When we sue people, I usually don't go to court. In the beginning, I did because I wanted to get a feel for what goes on.
On one of our cases, the lawyer for the defendant said pretty much the same thing you just said. The judge responded with the following: "While it may be true that your client was not aware that the plaintiff owned the content in question, at all times during the process, your client was WELL AWARE of who was NOT the owner of the content in question, HIM."
If you have so many paid ads, and so much legal content, why screw around with the rest of it?
Your use of the term "public domain" when discussing certain content on your site is what I object to. The overwhelming majority of content that you call public domain, is in fact, NOT.