Quote:
Originally Posted by DMcCunney
Sure. But Kurtz didn't give consent, and couldn't simply ignore the infringement. As far as I know, she was required to go after the fans. Filing suit is not something she wanted to spend time and money doing. Sufficient for copyright that you go after infringement you are aware of. You aren't expected to spend all your time looking for infringement - only to make an effort when you become aware of it. But as far as I know, if you are aware of infringement and don't take action, you can jeopardize your rights.
|
I don't believe that's true. I believe that the copyright owner has the right to say "I'm not prosecuting that; it has my permission to continue"--without losing the right to prosecute any future infringements.
Do you know of any cases or laws that indicate you lose copyright control if you don't enforce it? (Surely the RIAA victims would be happy to use that as a supporting detail in court, if it were true.)
I believe that either Kurtz got bad legal advice from someone who doesn't understand the difference between trademark and copyright--or she was upset at the idea of fans profiting from their love of her work, and wanted to stop them.