[WikiEN-l] Copyright violation

Sun Nov 16 05:13:29 UTC 2003

From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>
>   Alex R. wrote:
>
> >From: "Vicki Rosenzweig" <vr at redbird.org>
> >
> >At 08:47 AM 11/15/03 -0500, Alex756 wrote:
> >
> >>"Daniel Mayer" <maveric149 at yahoo.com> said:
> >>Arvind Narayanan wrote:
> >>
<...snip...>
> A legal take-down notice is a logical second step, and the timing here
> will often depend on time limits provided in the law.

There are no strict time limits, and one can always bring an infringement
action for damages, but one wants to try and get an injunction. Since
the DCMA OCILLA provisions are available, judges are going to ask,
why didn't you invoke those provisions before coming to court? That
is what they are there for.

> Beyond that, if the violator refuses, what strategies are available?

It is not up to the violator, it is up to the ISP. If the violator is also
an ISP,
well then you must sue if they issue the required counter notice and restore
the works.  The limitations period is four years.

>  Beginning a legal action may not be the best next step.  The choice of
> legal jurisdiction would only be a part of the problem.  Legal actions
> can be costly, especially if we want them to be effective.  Who would be
> responsible for those costs?  If there were someone with deep enough
>  pockets to foot that kind of bill, we could only drool at the kind of
> computer hardware that that could buy.  It would be immoral to expect
> Jimbo alon to be responsible for the costs of an action that could have
> far reaching implications about attempted claims of copyright on
> material that is in one way or another already freely available to the
> general community for its re-use.

If Wikipedia is registered as a collective work with the US Copyright
office, attorneys fees will be paid by the infringer. This is one reason
that
Wikipedia should be periodically registered as the copyright protection
is only available after registration (though unpublished works are not
required to be registered). Most copyright litigators will take on these
cases on contingency if the proper registrations are done.

> Protecting the public interest is a public sector function.  To some
> extent that comes into conflict with sincerely held Libertarian ideals
> which depend very much on the freedom and sense of responsibility of the
> individual.  Of course, there are too many big-buck vested interests
> involved with government for them to be a dependable ally.  If push
> comes to shove, strategic alliances may be required.
>
> Choosing the right opponent to go after will be important; a US based
> violator will at least avoid the problems that come with international
> law.  Are there other strategies available before it gets to the courts?

It has nothing to do with international law, the work is protected by US
law, if they infringe on the internet  it is published in the US and US
federal
courts have jurisdiction over foreigners. So I don't know what issues you
are trying to create here. If the infringer is overseas, get a US judgment
and then take it to the foreign court to be recognized. The trend is for
courts to recognize judgments, especially in areas of relatively uniform
laws, i.e. copyright that is applied through the Berne Convention (or other
conventions) on a fairly standard basis.

> >Once again this discussion should be on the Wikilegal discussion list
that
> >is what it was created for.
> >
> Some of us would prefer not to subscribe to yet another list. :-)   This
> is too important to be relegated to a low traffic list.
> Ec

Well, the general ideas that are covered here apply to all Wikimedia
projects
and the issues are legal ones, that is what the legal list is for. Isn't a
low
traffic list better because it is limited to those who are interested in
legal
topics?

Alex756