|
|
Posted by PTravel on 12/14/06 22:03
"Colin B" <Colin B@cb.org> wrote in message news:4581b274$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
> news:mV6gh.9203$hI.1730@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "J. Clarke" <Jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:elqi8m0opk@news4.newsguy.com...
>>> On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:52:07 -0800, PTravel wrote:
>>>
>>>> "J. Clarke" <Jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:elorp00tnq@news2.newsguy.com...
>
> snip
>
>>>> Youtube copyright infringers are children and very young
>>>> adults who don't work, don't create content and, most likely, don't
>>>> vote.
>>>
>>> You've determined this how? And what happens when those "children and
>>> very young adults" get older?
>>
>> I've determined this by looking at what's on Youtube, who is making the
>> arguments for "free downloading," and looking at who is getting sued. As
>> to what happens to the children, presumably they'll get some education as
>> well as some real world experience and understand that perpetual motion
>> machines don't exist, and if the incentive for creation is eliminated
>> from copyright there simply won't be anymore "tunes" to listen to.
>
> You say you are "looking at who is getting sued". Have you found any
> instances of uploaders to Youtube being sued? Have substantial damages
> been awarded in any of these cases?
I'm not aware of any such suits, but litigation isn't officially reported
unless (1) it's a publishable appellate decision, or (2) it's a lower court
ruling that the publishers of the official reporters find to be
"interesting" or "significant." In other words, the only way I'd know is if
it the media pick it up (or I wanted to spend some money on a Pacer or Lexis
search AND Youtube was named as a party. As for damages, in a copyright
action statutory damages are always available and can range to a maximum of
$250,000 per infringement.
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|