[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[dvd-discuss] virtual and real images
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: [dvd-discuss] virtual and real images
- From: "Mimi Rupp" <mkr212(at)nyu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:50:01 -0300
- References: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20020425181606703.AAA326@dns2.caprock-spur.com@there>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
i am puzzled by the recent S.Ct. decision on CPPA where the majority seems
to believe that it is impossible to discern a virtual image from a real
image? is that correct?
----- Original Message -----
From: Ronald Austin <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] ``irreparable damage to my client''
> On Thursday 25 April 2002 11:26 am, you wrote:
> > Well.... The rampaging floodgates google takedown notices have
> > and they seem to be successful.
> > I was fairly sure after the Scientology case (and its success) there'd
> > more. Lots more.
> > The most recent one is from 'Sara Glover', who appears to be upset that
> > upon a search for her name, her alt.sex.spanking story 'Vivian's Vow'
> > about 4 years ago is the first search result. Her lawyer is claiming
> > its copyright infringement to have her story in the cache, and also
> > claiming that the link to the *publically published on usenet* story is
> > contributory infringement.
> > They claim 'irreparable damage'... After reading it, I can see why! :)
> Heh, I couldn't resist either... Heck I never heard of that newsgroup
> now. I guess I'am too sheltered. (Nah, not likely)
> This is one of the things about the automatic copyright that stinks. If
> want to copyright something you should have to send a copy to the LOC and
> your $125.00. If it's not worth that much then it's not worth
> To me this thing ain't worth the poor electrons it took to make it.
> (It's pretty bad when you feel sorry for an electron!)
> > But seriously, what next? Google (and other search engines) won't be
> > to survive these incessent letters, if anyone gets into their mind that
> > they can make the past dissapear at their whim. (How many people have
> > usenet posts, mailing list flames, or mirrored copies of embarassing
> > webpages they wish would go away?)
> Wonder when they will find archive.org?
> I wonder what would happen if every C&D letter were to be followed up with
> Google filing suit on the P and their lawers for frivolous use of the
> IANAL so is this possible?
> Heh, maybe Google should sue Disney, and the MPAA or maybe send Congress a
> C&D letter.
> > http://chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=273
> > One wonders how one can require freedom of the presses and freedom of
> > speech, yet allow easy regulation of what books can and cannot be put in
> > a card catalog index.
> > Scott