The judge held a service liable for the non-commercial infringement of its users, because that service advertised itself as a competitor to other services which advertised themselves as suggesting to support the infringement of copyrighted material, thus making them liable under an “inducement to infringe” standard.
Those who can no longer innovate, litigate. The music industry is doing great but the recording industry is dead. Let’s not prop it up with bad laws and even worse legal decisions. They are the “horse and buggy” industry of the 21st century- totally obsolete.
Am I wrong or dies a decision like this leave it open for and publisher to sue a copier manufacturer. For example, if I copy a policy of a prospect to review the coverages for holes, that is a copyright infringement as I am using it to MY benefit. Does that give ISO the right to sue Cannon?
This is scary stuff.
The judge held a service liable for the non-commercial infringement of its users, because that service advertised itself as a competitor to other services which advertised themselves as suggesting to support the infringement of copyrighted material, thus making them liable under an “inducement to infringe” standard.
Those who can no longer innovate, litigate. The music industry is doing great but the recording industry is dead. Let’s not prop it up with bad laws and even worse legal decisions. They are the “horse and buggy” industry of the 21st century- totally obsolete.
Am I wrong or dies a decision like this leave it open for and publisher to sue a copier manufacturer. For example, if I copy a policy of a prospect to review the coverages for holes, that is a copyright infringement as I am using it to MY benefit. Does that give ISO the right to sue Cannon?
This is scary stuff.