Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
And the RIAA has claimed that the making-available part should be prosecuted just like copyright infringement, because it's too difficult to determine whether or not copies were actually made.
IMHO, this is like claiming that if you leave a book next to a photocopy machine, you are guilty of copyright infringement, because somebody *might* copy it.
|
I am not a fan of the RIAA, and in fact I think copyright law needs to be over-hauled in any case. That being said, I think it is more like leaving a book next to a photocopy machine with a sign on it that says, please make a copy of me.
Quote:
The server is not a person. The person who controls the server, who authorizes it to make the copies, is liable for whatever illegalities the server does.
We don't claim "he didn't commit murder; the knife killed that man." Saying "the server commits the act" is ridiculous.
|
True, but it is also true, that the knife cannot act on its own. Once a server is set up, it is perfectly capable of responding on its own. Downloading is actually an act in which two people actually must work together to infringe copyright. The "uploader" makes the files available but no copies are made until a "downloader" acts.
My point here is that there is quite a bit of sophistry going on here where people are claiming that downloaders are not infringing simply because they are
receiving the file and not making the copy. The fact is, that both the the uploader and the downloader have actively worked to infringe copright.
Quote:
|
And there would be a claim that, "whoever owns the server is liable," would make some sense--but that's what the safe harbor laws are designed to prevent, because without them, all internet business would grind to a screeching halt. (If business servers had to confirm that every email sent contained no illegal content, there'd be no business email.)
|
True, but safe harbor laws are not intended, nor do they protect businesses or services that knowingly exploit copyright law. Napstar, Kazaa and others have been essentially shutdown and fined millions of dollars because they knowingly encouraged illegal activity and profited from the infrigement of others.
--
Bill