Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Pirate?! WTF?!

On 2006-06-15, flatfish+++ <flatfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 19:33:23 +0000, Edwards wrote:
>
>>
>>> Looks like it qualifies to me.
>>>
>>> a) Criminal Infringement. - Any person who infringes a copyright willfully
>>> either -
>>>
>>> (1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
>>                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>>> Roy also makes money off the web pages where the images are being used.
>> 
>> That's revenue (allegedly), not a net gain.  How do you or Erik even
>> know that _Roy_ gets any of the "revenue" from those ads, and not his
>> web provider directly?
>
> See the word *purposes*, it means intent in this case

Right, so it would have to be _proven_ that Roy's _intent_ in sticking
the picture in front of one of his blog comments was specifically to
increase whatever alleged income he's receiving from the website (as
opposed to his intent being, e.g., that he found the picture
incidentally amusing or whathaveyou).

> It doesn't matter who makes the money because he is the primary party.

To paraphrase Erik, show me where the phrase "primary party" appears
in the quoted section on criminal copyright infringement.

> If I use say the song "Over the Rainbow" in my commercial for carwax and
> nobody buys the wax am I in violation of the copyright?

Umm, that's a _commercial_.  It's hardly a stretch to claim that
whatever you stick in your commercial is there for the "purpose" of
selling more of whatever it is you're selling.

> And BTW, for me this is an ethics issue.

Yeah, you'd been saying that for a while, then turned around above and
said "Looks like it qualifies to me" in response the claim of criminal
behavior.

-- 
Darrin

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index