686748
submission
Comments: 1 +- $4M Judgment For Linking to Infringing Files-> on Friday May 23 2008, @07:24PM I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicdoj.gif); width:50px; height:79px;
court
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The MPAA won judgments worth $4M against two sites that merely link to infringing content. But they're not arguing that it's an infringement of their distribution right like the RIAA has been with their 'making available' argument. Instead, they got the sites for 'contributory copyright infringement', just like RIAA v. LimeWire. To translate all that Legalese to English, search engines that primarily index copyright-infringing material and the people who run them may not be safe in the USA. And that applies even if the sites in question do not host any infringing materials, participate in, or encourage the infringement done by their users. And even honoring DMCA notices in order to take advantage of the DMCA Safe Harbor provisions hasn't prevented the **AA from suing."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
QOTD:
Some people have one of those days. I've had one of those lives.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Why mention LimeWire case? (Score:2)
Why the mention of the LimeWire case? LimeWire hasn't lost that case, and is probably going to win it if it doesn't settle.