>They are a business. Think "$ loss". With one, a single person may or >may not end his subscription for a small amount. With the other they >face fines of a high multiple of that. >What do YOU think they would do? Good Question James. We know that the person or company which owns "intellectual property'" is entitled to charge a price for its use. We also know they have the legal right to compensation for the theft of this property. Further, I would state that the ability to control the legal sale of/distribution of this media via online distribution (pay per view or single user purchase outright) is fundamental to the financial success of Broadband Media Providers and /or Media creators. What do I think they should do ? Perhaps selling an outrageously expensive PC hardware component for playback of the Copyrighted material (perhaps in conjunction with a card similar to that in DirectTV receivers) is a solution. It is not a perfect answer but, a step forward. And yes, I suppose one can argue this is a crackable solution too. Back to the original topic however, I did peruse the DMCA. I would agree the ISP is legally required by the DMCA to immediately ask the end user to remove the material and not distribute it. And from the sample letters submitted to the list, it appears the MPAA meets all their legal requirements under the DMCA. However, (and I am not a lawyer) it appears the ISP is released from liability if the "party notified" of the infraction acknowledges to the ISP that the copyrighted material has been destroyed or removed from the system (Section 202, Conditions, Paragraph E ???) . Simple as that ? I don't know but, it seems so. Perhaps someone on the list who has received the warning letter can respond to their ISP stating they removed the material and see what happens ??? Thought ? ~S~ Disclaimer: My own two cents...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jul 12 2002 - 16:58:10 PDT