Quote:
Originally Posted by Soldim
The interesting aspect, for me, is that the sites being blocked have not been part of the process. As far as I can see not one of the three sites has been given the opportunity to prove or argue that have nay non-infringement use.
[...]
In this case I am more than happy to believe they do little or nothing else (I had never heard of any of the three sites) than infringing copyrights, however, I strongly believe that a verdict where the accused has at no point been offered an opportunity for defense is a far cry from real justice and and unworthy of a rechtsstaat. |
I broadly agree with you, at a matter of principle.
The key is that the sites are
not defendents, the ISPs are.
In these cases, the courts have accepted that there is no point trying to join the sites as parties, as there is no reasonable belief that they would take part in proceedings if there were invited. That would not be the case for a 'normal' site.