Re: [Videolib] More on Pirate Bay & copyright

From: Jessica Rosner <maddux2014@gmail.com>
Date: Wed Apr 22 2009 - 13:51:29 PDT

You were arguing as below that there was little difference between the two.
I think the
article I posted and the VERY specific quote from SCOTUS in the Grokster
decision made it abundantly clear that A. there was a big difference and B
if such a site were based in the US they would indeed lose in a "slam
dunk" ( going back to our original argument).

It is also highly disingenuous of you to claim you are not taking sides when
you clearly think Pirate Bay people should not have been convicted and that
you would be upset if such a service based in the US where prosecuted. There
is a huge difference between a general search engine that picks up links to
illegal downloads and a company set up specifically for that purpose which
both profits from it and ignores all requests to remove the illegal links. I
am stunned you can't see the difference. I don't see any slippery slope
in the convictions of Pirate Bay, I see that for once folks who profit off
stealing the works of others got caught.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Mark Kopp <mkopp@iu08.org> wrote:

> Jessica, sometimes it appears that you just wish to argueÖ
>
>
>
> Who the hell compared Google to thieves??? You object to the idea that
> Pirate Bay was just like Google. Did you, or did you not, access the Pirate
> Bay website? The website, itself, is Google-like (they even have the same
> buttons). It is a quantified search engine. WHAT are you objecting to? No
> one compared Google to thieves. I simply stated the FACT that there isnít
> any information on Pirate Bay that you couldnít glean from the Internet
> through Google. All Pirate Bay did was organize it. And once again, my
> concern is the neutrality of the Internet. And ONCE AGAIN, my point is that
> I donít want some agendized beaurocrat determining the results of my
> Internet searches. Pirate Bay might have questionable ethics and Iím not
> taking sides, but it isnít any different than something like
> pricegrabber.com, whereby they culled the results of specific searches
> around the net and organized them in to one location. Even with Pirate Bay
> convicted, the SOURCES of their links are still available!!!
>
>
>
> With each conviction, the slippery slope gets steeper and steeper, and the
> teeth at the bottom of the slope are hungry beaurocrats who will determine
> what information you and I are allowed to view. Are there things on the
> Internet that I feel shouldnít be there? YUP! TONS of crap!!! But who
> determines what is crap and what is not?
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> *Mark W. Kopp*
>
> *Technology Assistant*
>
> *IT Department*
>
> *Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8*
>
> *4500 6th Avenue*
>
> *Altoona, PA 16602*
>
> *P: 814-940-0223 ext. 1384*
>
> *F: 814-949-0984*
>
> *C: 814-937-2802*
>
>
>
> *From:* videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:
> videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner
> *Sent:* Monday, April 20, 2009 9:42 PM
> *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> *Subject:* [Videolib] More on Pirate Bay & copyright
>
>
>
> That thread seemed a bit crowded but left things dangling. I particularly
> object to the idea that the Pirate was just like Google and that to compare
> them to thieves was not justified. I think it might help if folks googled
> some of the news articles on the trial. I found this part of one
> particularly interesting
>
> "These cases weren't decided by some local judge, either. The Grokster case
> went all the way to the Supreme Court<http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/06/5042.ars>,
> where the seminal MGM v. Grokster decision said that sites could not avoid
> all liability for copyright infringement simply by arguing that they have
> some legal uses.
>
> This was the famous *Sony* defense, from the case which legalized
> Betamax/VCR sales. It survived both federal court and the Ninth Circuit
> Court of Appeals, but the Supremes found that a *Sony* defense did have
> some limits:
>
> One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to
> infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps
> taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge
> of third-party action, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by
> third parties using the device, regardless of the device's lawful uses...
>
> Nothing in Sony requires courts to ignore evidence of intent to promote
> infringement if such evidence exists. It was never meant to foreclose rules
> of fault-based liability derived from the common law. Where evidence goes
> beyond a product's characteristics or the knowledge that it may be put to
> infringing uses, and shows statements or actions directed to promoting
> infringement, Sony's staple-article rule will not preclude liability...
>
> On the record presented, respondents' unlawful objective is unmistakable.
> The classic instance of inducement is by advertisement or solicitation that
> broadcasts a message designed to stimulate others to commit violations. "
>
> Whole article is here
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/why-no-one-should-be-shocked-by-the-pirate-bay-verdict.ars
>
> There are other articles which stress that Pirate Bay was nothing like
> Google and was indeed set up for the purpose of helping people illegally
> download material and ignored all requests from rights holders to cease
> doing so.
>
>
>
> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues
> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control,
> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and
> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective
> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication
> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
> distributors.
>
>

VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Received on Wed Apr 22 13:52:10 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 20 2009 - 15:09:52 PDT