Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
And yet the gentleman involved was found guilty, was he not?
|
Yep. Because he didn't use that as a defense; he basically said "all torrenting not done for direct payment should be legal." The judge's opinion read like she was *begging* the defense to come up with *anything* that would let her justify some of the filesharing, and they failed to try anything remotely potentially reasonable.
Her opinion made it clear that she doesn't believe "all unauthorized filesharing is theft," and would take seriously both free-speech and fair-use defenses.
So it's possible that if the Harry Potter ebooks ever hit a US court, "there is no authorized version, and no intention to provide one, therefore I'm not infringing on any market rights" might work as a defense.
Might. Depends on the judge and exact circumstances of the case.
This hopeful thought doesn't quite inspire me enough to create a "free download 7 Harry Potter books + Beedle + Qudiditch + Monsters" website, though.