|
 |
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:43:04 -0500, Warp wrote:
> argus <arg### [at] npqr net> wrote:
>> No, I'm not missing the point. I am trying to get a few people to
>> undetake the difficult task of learning how to make a basis for an
>> accusation before attempting to influence others votes.
> Right, you are not missing *your* point. However, you are missing the
> *original* points, as well as *my* point.
> My point (and I believe the original one as well) is that this is not
> about accusing anyone of anything. This is about the IRTC team taking
> the *risk* of a possible lawsuit because they are distributing
> copyrighted material in their website.
And he is correctly saying there is no risk at all. If the copyright
holder notifies the IRTC of the violation and the IRTC removes it, that
is the end of it. Lawsuits are not permitted if the material is promptly
deleted. If one were filed it would likely be considered barotry which
could make the IRTC rich should the RIAA file it.
The recourse they would have would be against the person who
submitted the material and they could sue for every penny he earned from
the creation and treble damages. Zero plus three times zero is still zero.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
