Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
Why do you keep asking me what the court's argument is?
I have posted an extract, and a link is available to the full judgement.
You can just go and read it and find out for yourself what the court said.
|
I've read it.
Quote:
|
The grant or purported grant to do the relevant act may be express or implied from all the relevant circumstances.
|
Quote:
i) Its name – The Pirate Bay – and associated pirate ship logo are clearly a reference to the popular terminology applied to online copyright infringement: online piracy.
ii) According to a statement published on its site, it was founded by a "Swedish anti copyright organisation".
iii) The matters described in paragraph 13 above.
iv) In the first instance judgment in the Swedish criminal proceedings, Lundström was recorded as stating that "the purpose of the site was pirate copying".
|
It is clear to the court that TPB isn't pretending to be anything else than a pirate site. Therefore it doesn't make any sense that they would also declare that TPB was trying to get the public to think otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
Favourite writer, and the official ebooks of his only came out a few months ago.
|
Doesn't this make it a bad example? When you have illegal sources as the only sources for ebooks by this author for years, why would you expect the legal sources to jump at the top of the search when they finally come on the market?