If Sony were really serious about using the _DMCA_ against this guy, they would have had his ISP shut his sight down. The DMCA specifically grants Sony the ability to tell his ISP to shut him down - without notifying him directly. It's obvious to me that Sony's own lawyers don't think they have a real DMCA claim.
(The law firm I work for represents an ISP, and we had to advise our client that, yes when someone requests that you shut down a site under the provisions of the DMCA, you have to do it, otherwise the ISP will be held responsible. The DMCA is a big stick, and can be used to very quickly shut down a site. Sony was in no rush to get these files off the internet)
Please quote the passage that states this. You'll have a real hard time coming up with it since it doesn't exist.
Lawyers tend to read into laws what they feel will benefit them at the time. Since very little of the law is clear enough for the real world, most decisions are based on past verdicts. That is why there are law libraries, after all.
Also, your statements assume that Victor Matsuda is fully versed in all aspects of life, including the law. Since nobody on this planet is, that is a faulty assumption and your argument is invalid. It is likely that he has not even read the DMCA. He was just continuing what he saw as an incomplete job by his predecessor. Since the backlash to this has been so strong, he might actually lose his job. Japanese companies can be pretty harsh.
The law firm I work for represents an ISP, and we had to advise our client that, yes when someone requests that you shut down a site under the provisions of the DMCA, you have to do it, otherwise the ISP will be held responsible.
That is simply incorrect, and I know this even though IANAL. Under the DMCA, the ISP customer who is alleged to be posting infringing content, gets to write a response to the charge, before any action is taken. If the ISP customer does not respond, then the ISP can take down the site to avoid contributory liability. But if the customer responds to the charge, the ISP is off the hook, and if they then take the site down, the are open to a suit from the customer for breach of contract.
About the time we think we can make ends meet, somebody moves the ends.
-- Herbert Hoover
If Sony were really serious... (Score:2, Interesting)
(The law firm I work for represents an ISP, and we had to advise our client that, yes when someone requests that you shut down a site under the provisions of the DMCA, you have to do it, otherwise the ISP will be held responsible. The DMCA is a big stick, and can be used to very quickly shut down a site. Sony was in no rush to get these files off the internet)
I Am the Greetest! (Score:1)
I will now leave this planet for absolutely no raisin.
Re:If Sony were really serious... (Score:2)
Or do you expect us to believe that you work at a lawfirm without enough grasp of the language to know the difference between sight and site?
-Peter
Re:If Sony were really serious... (Score:1)
Please quote the passage that states this. You'll have a real hard time coming up with it since it doesn't exist.
Lawyers tend to read into laws what they feel will benefit them at the time. Since very little of the law is clear enough for the real world, most decisions are based on past verdicts. That is why there are law libraries, after all.
Also, your statements assume that Victor Matsuda is fully versed in all aspects of life, including the law. Since nobody on this planet is, that is a faulty assumption and your argument is invalid. It is likely that he has not even read the DMCA. He was just continuing what he saw as an incomplete job by his predecessor. Since the backlash to this has been so strong, he might actually lose his job. Japanese companies can be pretty harsh.
Re:If Sony were really serious... (Score:2)
That is simply incorrect, and I know this even though IANAL. Under the DMCA, the ISP customer who is alleged to be posting infringing content, gets to write a response to the charge, before any action is taken. If the ISP customer does not respond, then the ISP can take down the site to avoid contributory liability. But if the customer responds to the charge, the ISP is off the hook, and if they then take the site down, the are open to a suit from the customer for breach of contract.