I've read that article too, and really had to laugh at how threatening it sounds. Here are a few myths that it didn't address:
1) If you infringe a copyright, you're basically screwed and are going to be prosecuted.
- Yes, if you infringe a copyright, you are in the wrong. Unless you can pull off a fair use or de minimus (too minor to be significant) defense, you would, in theory, be convicted in a court of law.
- Are you going to be prosecuted? Probably not. The reality of the legal system is that hiring an attorney, especially to pursue a real trial, is entirely too expensive to be worthwhile. Unless you're making some serious cash off of infringement, thereby enabling you to pay for judgments entered against you, a copyright owner is simply not going to bother. It's just too damned expensive. Most people who infringe copyrights on the adult web are small-time operations or newbies that run sites for beer money - how can a copyright owner financially justify hiring a lawyer at $300 an hour to pursue a claim against such a person?
2) The US is at the forefront of copyright law, and everyone looking for a free ride should move to some European country.
- Err, not really. While the US is certainly one of the more stringent enforcers of copyrights, much of our law comes from following the lead of Europe. For example, the fairly recent addition of default renewal periods was taken from French and German laws (basically, you don't have to renew copyrights anymore, they last for the full 70-someodd year time period by default). Anyone else remember the hoopla over TNT colorizing "It's a Wonderful Life?" The family of the writer lost their case against the network in the US, but won in Europe, where they extend copyright protection to the entire creative work essentially forever. Certainly, America is better than places like developing Asia and the Middle East as far as copyright enforcement is concerned, but we are by no means at the forefront.
3) Lin Milano won judgments against webmasters for violating an arcane portion of the California Civil Code, which protects a celebrity's "right of publicity".
- This one hits close to home, as I run celebrity sites. In actuality, Milano settled out of court in every case. Why? Because she was going after pioneer webmasters who were making serious bank in the early days of the web, but yet didn't have the money to fight in court. These days, she uses scare tactics like quoting "substantial judgments" (funny, I thought judges had to enter judgments). If you've ever read a Cybertrackers notice you'll know what I'm talking about. What's funny is if you click the link she includes in her email, it's an article written by HER LAWYER claming that most webmasters are unsophisticaed and will respond to the same scare tactics she uses.
I'm attempting to boil this down as much as possible, but as in everything, there is no black and white. As a 2nd year law student myself, I've become familiar with the sort of tactics that attorneys use to coerce others and drum up business for themselves. It's sometimes sad that some folks can use their ability to write legalese to scare the shit out of people, but such is what you will probably encounter at some point in your career or personal life.
------------------
50/50 Celebrity Partnership Program