Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
You are of course perfectly entitled to your opinion, but I suspect you'd struggle to convince anyone that the primary purpose of MR is to facilitate copyright infringement, which is unquestionably the case with these sites that have been blocked. The test that courts have applied for many years in cases of this nature is "does the site" (or whatever) "have any significant non-infringing use". It probably wouldn't be too tough to convince someone that MR does have non-infringing uses, but you'd struggle to show that any of the sites that have been blocked do.
|
Once they've got rid of all the alleged "primary purpose" infringing sites do you really think they will stop there?
Anyway, without any way for the sites in question to defend themselves it will be whatever the claimant states that matters, not the truth.