posted
Aug 21, 2010 by News Hunter
"People from Blogger / Attorney Ray Beckerman combined with several other law professors to ask the Supreme Court's intestinal copyright infringer innocent" defense. "Today, law professor Charles Nesson, Harvard, and" Recording Industry vs the first two lawyers in the fight against RIAA P2P lawsuits have taken their fight to the Supreme Court.
His actions constituted a violation of copyright, the court, in its discretion, may reduce the statutory damages to a sum of at least $ 200 ".. On appeal, however, the decision was overturned by a panel three judges (PDF) for the Fifth Circuit, and took a long shot to protect innocent infringer. [he] did not know and had no reason to believe that copyright. provides that "if the author the alleged violation, the burden of proof.
House has studied at Harvard under Nesson, his former teacher and now filed a brief arguing that the decision of the appellate court is only strange in his face. "The conclusion is absurd to believe that record stores never seen by the offender, simply use the digital home, with a tax notice of copyright," they write. The case was brought before the Supreme Court, which is represented by Kiwi Camara Harper (who also represented Jammie Thomas Rasset his second trial).
"This pernicious doctrine of substantive review before it becomes permanent and a database of precedent for the tax on Internet users .." It is wrong to interpret a law passed by Congress to protect innocent infringers in an analog world, to deny the mitigation of damages for breach digital, "wrote law professors.
Related Stories
