Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
That's of course, not a simple issue. I can see a couple more different angles on it, including a rule that US courts have jurisdiction if the end user resides in the US . There will be a fight , but I expect there will be resolution on this issue before too long . AS to the general copyright questionwait your post on that issue.
|
Define "end user." The person uploading? The person downloading? The person who owns copyright? (What if copyright is owned by a multinational company?)
The problem isn't with defining jurisdiction for actions online; it's with establishing *one, consistent* set of criteria for jurisdiction. Publishers want to punish the owners of websites hosted in Australia, but they don't want to sell ebooks to people who live in Australia.
Sorting out "what jurisdiction covers which computer transactions" is an issue that should've been dealt with decades ago, and it's telling that none of the media companies fighting for "piracy reform" are fighting to establish that. That should be at the top of their problem list. Instead, they're trying to push an international treaty--not law brought through normal legislative measures--to bypass the need to make that definition.