[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Internet movies loses in Hawaii
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Internet movies loses in Hawaii
- From: Glendon Gross <gross(at)xinetd.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 21:30:58 -0700
- Organization: Xinetd Communications
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3EFD9FBB.5276.2702C5@localhost>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
Now I really would like to see someone produce the Perry Mason show previewed
Maybe we can find someone who will produce it and make it available for free
I for one would be happy to buy a copy if it ever comes out on DVD, "just to
support the playright". :)
> On 28 Jun 2003 at 11:57, Marcia Wilbur wrote:
> Date sent: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 11:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Marcia Wilbur <email@example.com>
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [dvd-discuss] Internet movies loses in Hawaii
> Send reply to: email@example.com
> > Mike Rossi of InternetMovies.com lost in HI court against the MPAA.
> Extracted Fronm
> > http://www.entlawdigest.com/story.cfm?storyID=2774
> US Magistrate Judge Barry M. Kurren noted that the tortious interference
> claims required a showing that the MPAA acted ?without justification.? The
> judge said that here the MPAA had acted within its rights
> in sending a notice to FlexNet.
> Kurren ruled that there was no provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright
> Act (DMCA) that required a copyright holder to conduct an investigation to
> establish actual infringement prior to sending a notice to an ISP. ?Rather, the
> DMCA only requires a copyright holder to form a good faith belief of an
> alleged or ?claimed? infringement prior to sending an ISP a notice.? The judge
> found that there was little question that the statements on the plaintiff?s
> home page ?strongly suggest, if not expressly state, that movies were
> available for downloading from the site.? Accordingly, the judge found that the
> MPAA had more than a sufficient basis to form the required good faith belief
> that InternetMovies.com was engaged in copyright infringement.
> Kurren ruled that since the MPAA was justified in sending the notices
> to the ISP, the plaintiff cannot show tortious interference and those counts
> must be dismissed.
> I think the only part of the Judges logic I can fault is the "good faith
> belief". .....<wavy screen>
> Perry Mason - "So you saw claims that movies could be downloaded?"
> Jack Valenti - "Yes I did and I directed our legal staff to take actions
> PM - "Did you actually visit their website?"
> JV - "yes I did"
> PM - "you have a computer in your office don't you"
> JV - "yes I do"
> PM- "when did you get it?"
> JV "just last month?"
> PM- "Is this your first one?"
> JV -"No I've had several"
> PM-"three or four?"
> PM - "So you are aware how to use all the periperals such as the keyboard,
> speakers, mouse"
> JV - 'yes"
> PM- "and you know how to use the standard software I assume such as a word
> processor, netscape internet browser, email"
> JV - "I use Internet Explorer"
> PM-"when you use Internet Explorer, how fast does it load?"
> JV - "I don't understand"
> PM-"well when you click on a graphics image at a website, how long does it take
> for it to come up? When you click on a video clip, how long does it take for ti
> to start running'
> JV-"seconds! We have high speed internet access at the MPAA!"
> PM-"So tell the court Mr Valenti, how you can claim to have made a good faith
> belief when you are clearly computer literate enough to use a mouse, know how
> to click that mouse on images or videos using Internet Explorer and have a
> hight speed line to actually download and verify that copyrighted material
> acutally is present?"
> JV- "ahhhhh...ohhhh"
> PM - "I would suggest to the court that by not making that final effort that
> your easily could have done that you deliberately did not verify the claims of
> copyright infringement and that you acted in bad faith.
> < unwavy screen>
> The judge split hairs here. The investigation was trivial and would have taken
> far less time than this court case did. As such I dispute the good faith claim
> and had he been more computer literate would have too.
> > *** ignore your rights, they'll go away ***
> > - marcia wilbur