Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 1:52pm

   
   

   gotta love the dmca file&forget
   it does not get any better

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:00pm

   
   

   Wow, this one is beyond reason. If you look at the figures the only resemblance to Wolverine is one character has sideburns. Instead of blogging he should retain a lawyer who will work for a cut of the settlement cuz they have 20th Century by the balls.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   interval, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:08pm

   
   

   And we're always reminded that ignorance of the law is no excuse...

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   So?

   

   Coyote, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:08pm

   
   

   Host. Somewhere. Else.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Re: So?

   

   The infamous Joe, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:21pm

   
   

   Why should he have to? He hasn't done anything wrong!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   Overcast, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:21pm

   
   

   I wonder how much money these companies are wasting on trolling the web for their crap...
   
   And because they are acting like such asses - when I go to the Cinema next, I will intentionally avoid any and all movies from this company.
   
   This is so stupid, I don't know why people even bother with their content anymore. This is really crying out "WE NEED NEW MEDIA COMPANIES".

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Shoot First Questions Later

   

   Davis Freeberg, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 2:23pm

   
   

   It does sound like he has a lousy hosting company, but there should be consequences when the studios make these types of false accusations. I bet if some random person started filing DMCA complaints against the official Wolverine site, it would never even get pulled down.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Re: Shoot First Questions Later

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:09pm

   
   

   There are consequences for filing false DMCA takedowns. Its part of the DMCA itself, and has always been there. Thats the whole point of this article, to point out that the hosting company has no clue how the DMCA works.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   Re:

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:10pm

   
   

   why avoid their movies? Just download them for free like everyone else does. And keep downloading them for free until they figure it out.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    Slackr, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:20pm

    
    

    Honestly this is just sad. Take a look at those photos and TRY and see the similarity. Someone at 20th Century Fox either has way too much time on their hands, a drug habit, or a really really good imagination (probably all three).
    
    This kind of stuff should never happen. Plain ridiculous.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    Re: Re: Shoot First Questions Later

    

    Anonymous Coward, Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:37pm

    
    

    There hasn't been any consequences to anyone as of yet that I've heard of. The consequences should be to who ever file the false DMCA take-down notice. As I understand it part of the DMCA take-down notice is that the copyright of the subject material is owned by the originator of the notice. Even a moron in a hurry (I know that's actually a legal standard for trademark law) would know that these images have nothing to do with the Wolverine therefore Fox and their lawyers have violated the law. They should be prosecuted and the lawyers who actually filed the notice should be disbarred or at the very least severely sanctioned. But that would mean the law was actually fair and equally enforced.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    The law is fair, just and equitable

    

    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Apr 20th, 2009 @ 3:40pm

    
    

    ...for anyone who can afford it.
    
    In a related development, the estate of General Burnsides is considering its legal options.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    Re: Re: So?

    

    Anonymous Coward, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:26am

    
    

    Because his host is an idiot and he shouldn't be giving them his money.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    Re: Re: Shoot First Questions Later

    

    Anonymous Coward, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 6:28am

    
    

    There are potential consequences, but that doesn't mean they're enforced.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    Re: Re: So?

    

    hegemon13, Apr 21st, 2009 @ 10:28am

    
    

    Well, he doesn't have to. He can continue to get ripped off. I can tell you that if a store sold me a defective good and gave me a hard time returning it, I probably wouldn't go back. This seems like a similar situation. He CAN continue to use this host, but personally, I'd move my stuff far away from them and warn all my associates to avoid them, as well.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment