[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] "under penalty of perjury"

This is something that I've been thinking about as well. I'm in the
(unfortunate) situation of being in hostmaster DNS recpient list at
work. I't getting to the point of getting one of these takedown notice
e-mails a day. I'm just glad that I don't have to follow up on them. :)

My thinking is if there are no legal remedies, bill'em. Somebody has to
follow up on these take takedown e-mails. If the e-mail is correct, then
we remove the files under the safe harbour provisions. If the e-mail is
incorrect, then bill the sender according to the amount of time taken
and FTE rates of the employees. If they don't pay then send it to a
collection agency, or go to small claims court, or just plain file suit
if the monetary amount is signficant enough.

If every ISP and business did this, the BSA and *AAs of the world would
certainly change their procedures. If it was wide spread enough, could
this sort of thing become a class action suit (as much as I detest most
of them).

On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 10:27, Tim Neu wrote:
> I saw this on slashdot, regarding auto-cease and decist notifications for
> supposed copyright violations (in this case, MS sending C&D notifications to a
> school hosting openoffice), and it got me wondering:
> What prevents the sender of emails like this from being charged with perjury?  
> Is at a requirement that someone making a perjurous statement know their
> statement to be untrue, or is the penalty invoked by sending a message like
> this in the first place? 
> Presumably the clause is intended to lend credibility to the take-down request.   
> http://distribution.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=581265&listName=dev
> Just wondering why we don't start making use of the perjury clause to give
> companies something to think about.   Presumably, reckless mass-mailing of C&D
> notices would give way to careful considerations of the consequences of being
> wrong, and only acting when it is CERTIAN that infringement is taking place...
> If it could be enforced.   Any thoughts?

Stephen L Johnson <sjohnson@monsters.org>