Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
But they were under copyright protection, and Mr Moynihan was proven guilty. IMHO he was unwise to let it go as far as a court case, when he could have easily avoided all the unpleasantness which resulted, but that's just a personal opinion.
|
He was correct to let it go to court.
As I said, too many companies assert rights that they do not have. Mr Moynihan's research showed no copyright. So Conde Nast needed to
prove that they were under copyright.
Also, my understanding (so I could be wrong) was that there was no "please take down this material in a reasonable amount of time" notice. One day, everything's fine - content has been there for years in some cases. The next day, site taken down because of copyright complaint.