Verizon vs the DMCA
Android Cat
icle_Type1&c=Article&cid=1035777269205&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705
925735
Verizon lawyers want U.S. District Judge John D. Bates to wait until a
federal appeals court reviews the case before they are forced to disclose
the identity of an Internet subscriber suspected of illegally offering
more than 600 songs from top artists.
<snip>
"If this ruling stands, consumers will be caught in a digital dragnet not
only from record companies alleging infringement of their copyright
monopolies but from anyone who can fill out a simple form," Thorne said.
<snip>
"I have never seen any provision like this," Swire said. ``There's no due
process, no judicial supervision. If the court's order stands, these
subpoenas will become a new form of spam."
<snip>
Ava-spam? :^)
Ron of that ilk.
Zinj
androi...@hotmail.com says...
Shades of 'Safe'.
My major objection to the DMCA has been, and remains the complete lack of
realistic punitive measures against fraudulent use.
That a commercial site might be able to sue for abuse for actual damages
is completely irrelevant for a non-commercial or informative site, as
*all* Scientology critical sites are.
The DMCA *should* have automatic and draconian punitive damages. This
should include a fine for filing a DMCA complaint that does *not* result
in an actual lawsuit following the response that reinstates the site.
Likewise in Safe's case, the subpoena that resulted in the revelation of
his/her real name and address *should* have resulted in an immediate and
substantial fine when no actual lawsuit was filed.
I think it's a mistake to tar the DMCA, which does have some good
aspects, for the glaring errors and injustices it should never have had.
Zinj
--
Scientology is the *Cure* for escalating Health Care Costs
'We didn't think it was a big deal'
'She died! People die! - David Miscavige