RIAA Threatening ICANN About .music; Claiming It Will Be Used To Infringe
from the when-you're-an-organization-of-lawyers... dept
Oh look, the RIAA is overreacting yet again — and doing so the only way it knows how: by rolling out the legal threats. This time it’s threatening ICANN over its new top level domain program, which allows all sorts of new TLDs to be registered — including planned proposals for a .music domain. But the RIAA isn’t happy about this, because:
We are concerned that a music themed gTLD will be used to enable wide scale copyright and trademark infringement.
I’m sort of at a loss how the specific TLD makes any difference whatsoever in enabling infringement. A website’s a website, no matter what the TLD is. How will having a new TLD enable any more infringement at all? It seems like the real goal of this is (of course) to get ICANN to act as a copyright cop for any such TLD. Just as the RIAA has sought to make copyright cops out of ISPs, the government and other third parties, now it’s seeking help from ICANN, who hopefully knows better. So it suggests that it would like to “work with ICANN… to ensure this type of malicious behavior does not occur.”
And, of course, in typical RIAA fashion, if ICANN says no, the RIAA plans to go legal:
We strongly urge you to take these concerns seriously… we prefer a practical solution to these issues, and hope to avoid the need to escalate the issue further.
I’d love to see the RIAA try to “escalate the issue further.” What’s it going to do? Is any court really going to go so far as to say that just because something that has not yet been created, and might possibly in some weird stretch of the imagination be used for infringement, that ICANN has to block it?
Filed Under: domains, icann, music, riaa, tlds, top level domains
Companies: icann, riaa
Comments on “RIAA Threatening ICANN About .music; Claiming It Will Be Used To Infringe”
So, wait… just the word “music” by itself implies infringement now? They really do see themselves as the gatekeepers of all culture, huh?
It’s not just “.torrent = .crime” anymore, apparently. Now it’s “ALL MUSIC = crime unless it is explicitly and completely controlled by us”
Re: Re:
They say they are looking for, quote “practical solutions”. What’s more practical then getting all music from them?
Re: Re:
“So, wait… just the word “music” by itself implies infringement now?”
No, just music AND THE INTERNET. Remember, the INTERNETS makes everything illegal, criminal, and dangerous.
Re: Re: Re:
.music is killing music!
Also
Billions of children are born with ears every year. What are doctors doing to make sure these ears are not being used to listen to illegal music?
RIAA would love to work the medical professionals to stop music piracy at its source, the human ear.
We strongly urge you to take these concerns seriously… we prefer a practical solution to these issues, and hope to avoid the need to escalate the issue further.
Re: Also
lold hard. So true
Re: Also
Don’t forget the air that is constantly being used to transfer illegal sound waves to pirate eardrums around the world.
Saying you shouldn’t be responsible for looking after your own content, someone else should is like saying you shouldn’t watch after your own children, someone else should. I guess they really don’t actually care all that much about THEIR music/musicians…
Re: Re:
You should let about 1/3 of parents know this too, they seem to think its the responsibility of others to raise their kids =/
Re: Re:
Worked for the Parents Television Council.
I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
In the not to distant past, people shared files by walking them over on disk. They also shared tapes and copied each others tapes. With RIAA and MPAA going further and further out of control, I can see the sneakernet making a comeback. Of course then Nike and Addidas will be getting hate mail from RIAA too.
Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
don’t forget the following parties in contributory infringement…
-USPS for mailing the CDs and memory sticks
-Transit system for letting pirates taking them to go to destination
-Telco for letting them discuss meeting details
-7-11 for supplying delicious snacks and drinks when pirates are hungry and thirsty
-Music stores for selling the “source CD” for piracy
-Parents for raising pirates (oh wait, they are already on the list)
-Backpack companies for providing bags for carrying pirating material
-Stationary makers for making envelopes
-RIAA for organizing artists in a easy to target list for pirates
.
.
.
Oh hell, just sue them all.
Re: Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
..oh.. Don’t forget Seagate, WD, Samsung, Hitachi, and other HDD manufacturers that store pirated content..
..and Intel, AMD, and other processor companies that run the computers that store pirated content.
Oh hell, the CD/DVD Drive manufacturers too.. These devices are used to copy the CD to the computers’ HDD.
You know what, let’s just sue Dell, HP, Lenovo, and any other computer manufacturer because they’re selling tools (computers) to pirate their material.
Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
I have fond memories of the sneakernet plus games and music…
Additionally, with the rise of large, cheap volumes it becomes so much easier.
For example, I could fit every song I’ve ever heard on a 2 terabyte harddrive (with room left over for more music). Slap it into an external case, and I can easily give a copy of every song I’ve ever heard to every person I visit.
Re: Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
While my post was in jest, I do see the old fashioned copy-directly-from-friends file sharing coming back into vogue.
Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
Sneakernet stops working the moment you cant buy media. Anyone remember “Audio CDRs”?
Re: Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
Given that the media these days consists of USB keys and external hard drives, good luck stopping that.
Yeah and the catholic church wants .TV removed as a tld because transvestites might use it.
Very strange. I have met Constantine Roussos, the main guy behind .music at a couple LA area events and he is very anti piracy, almost to the point where he might be the arbiter of what can be done on this TDL. There is even a site called fightpiracy.org that endorses the .music TDL. http://www.fightpiracy.org/endorsers.html I think it is the your “entitlement” argument, Mike. RIAA feels entitled to control all things music related.
Re: Re:
Roussos owns fightpiracy.org and probably tweets for @fightpiracy. I think the RIAA is trying to control the conversation so that they can have more power over .music conversation than Roussos. Roussos is better off calling them out on their pretend ignorance and failing to champion Roussos’s cause than say “yes, we share your concern.” Give all of this, the control of .music is better in the hands of ICANN than the RIAA.
Re: Re: Re:
I really want to see ICANN call RIAA’s bluff. What could they possibly sue them for and win?
I’d like to see the RIAA bankrupt itself into oblivion, finally get out of everyone’s way, and let’s see where the horses run.
I suppose I’ll also have to unmount all the volumes on my disk array because, as the name suggests, I can only listen to pirated music on them
Perhaps ICAAN can offer a practical solution to RIAA and allow them their own gTLD – .arseholes for instance
Re: Re:
how about .brainlessmorons or .chickenlittle?
Re: Re: Re:
how about .brainlessmorons or .chickenlittle?
Heh, how about just .riaa.
As far as I am concerned, when I see RIAA, I think arseholes, brainlessmorons, chickenlittle, and hypocriticalbitches all at the same time…so no need being redundant.
Plus, if by assigning them .riaa means I can, once and for all, filter .riaa at my firewalls, I’ll be happy. I am not a pirate (well, I had an emusic account, and they probably consider that and itunes to be pirate sites) but their propaganda is getting seriously tired.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
mafiosa seems good.
Couple quick random thoughts ... on the line
“We are concerned that a music themed gTLD will be used to enable wide scale copyright and trademark infringement.”
Random thoughts ….
What they are probably worried about is every band on myspace and every other social networking site creating a web site on that TLD. I mean a a TLD whose sole purpose is music must really scare the crap out of them. With dedicated .MUSIC search engines, and all the other things that will pop up around it. Thats a total lack of control.
Thinking about it all they need to do is get their buddies at ICE and HomeSec to declare the whole TLD illegal and confiscate it.
If this TLD happens I am going to have to revise my label experation date down again.
Dumb.
I don’t know why they’re so concerned with .music when they really need to be worrying about .piracy 🙂
Re: Dumb.
What about pirate.music ?
Re: Re: Dumb.
“A yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum!”
Re: Dumb.
please visit my site
ilove.piracy
...
Perhaps the music industry should crank out a product worth paying for. Not condoning piracy or anything, just saying that what is being produced can hardly be called music.
Perhaps they would rather the .lackingMusicalContent gTLD?
Seems most of the music worth stealing is being given away by artists anyway (Radiohead, Reznor, etc).
I find it sad and amusing that the first thing occur to RIAA’s mind is how .music will be used for piracy and not for promotion from the artists.
Now that’s negativity.
Re: Cheapskates
I think I got it. They just don’t want to buy RIAA.music and run another domain.
Re: Re:
That’s a sign to anyone who wants to make music that the RIAA is not an option any more.
Latest news!
RIAA requests banning everything!
In a startling announcement today RIAA spokesman Smoky McCracken requested that everything be banned. “Absolutely anything can be used to infringe our properties,” McCracken said. “Without record companies there would be no music, and without music, life itself would not exist. It’s vital to the survival of the human race that everything be banned, unless we already own it.”
Is any court
really going to go so far as to say that just because something that has not yet been created, and might possibly in some weird stretch of the imagination be used for infringement, that ICANN has to block it?
In today’s climate? Well, yes. As absurd as it sounds to us…
although you may well be taking the piss, what RIAA and the rest of the entertainment industries are actually trying to do is CONTROL EVERYTHING, and that means not just music, movies, games etc. but EVERYTHING, both on and off the internet. the legal threats are there to try to force the costs of doing their dirty work on to other companies but they get the profit from the results.
had all of this been challenged from day one, all those years ago, i am convinced that the internet at least, would not be in the shambles it is now and law suits would not be so prevalent. maybe governments and courts would be less inclined to believe the bull shit they get told and encouraged to take as gospel and act for the people, instead of just catering for corporations that have no interest what so ever in anything or anyone but filling their own coffers further.
.music
I really hope they don’t muck this up, because I was hoping to get a .music TLD.
But I give away some of my music, so it would probably be seized by ICE anyway.
Biting off more than you can chew
This RIAA letter to ICANN brings to mind an image of a Chihuahua yapping at a Great Dane going: “Come on! You want a piece of this? You want a piece of this? Bring it on, beeee-a-tch!”
Anyone else notice a distinct lack of dissenting ACs on this post? That’s pretty impressive – the RIAA has gotten so ridiculous that even their automatic defenders are keeping quiet on this one.
Re: Re:
I like being an AC, because it means that people don’t write off my comments because of my username or previous posts.
The ACs that you are referring to are probably not here, because the comments from the RIAA in this article are indefensible.
Re: Re: Re:
Indeed – that’s why I was stopped and added “dissenting” to my statement. By no means are all the ACs here a pain in the ass – but I think we all know what I’m talking about 🙂
Re: Re:
If it helps, I can call you a moronic freetard while not offering any reasonable counter-argument. 🙂
Re: Re: Re:
That will make me feel right at home. Cheers.
Re:
Well if the RIAA is that upset about it, they should know the solution. If I remember right, ICANN will be selling off the rights to administer the new TLDs (which in my opinion are pointless-soon there will be way too many to even keep track of) to whoever pays for the privilege. So if the RIAA is that concerned about it, why don’t they just pay the huge fee to become the primary registrar for the .music domain and then they can do whatever the want with it?
Re: Re:
This is not part of their paradigm, paying for stuff like policing their own properties or artists they say they represent.
Only the RIAA and their lawyers get paid. In accordance with the paradigm, ICANN shall pay the RIAA to take this horrific threat of a domain off of their hands. They will then collect rents on all sites using the domain, taxpayers will foot the bill for their accusations of infringement against their own customers who are all criminals anyway, and artists will continue to be missing and presumed dead when it’s time to pay out.
Snark aside, the RIAA is especially miffed that ICANN dared to add a statement to their rules for doling out these new domains – actual proof is required, not just a claim, of harm done by any site using the domain that is accused of infringing activities. Proof of harm is what the RIAA wants no part of, it would wreck the paradigm.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Thanks MIke for the article about .music and all the concerns that we have in regards to safely and responsibly launching the .music top-level domain extension for the music community.
Our policies in regards to .music domains will be focused on outlawing copyright infringement. Our policies will go beyond what ICANN requires and the standard norm for domain name registrations thus far.
The .music domain extension will be a community-based initiative with stringent policies in regards to registration rules. Only members of approved .music Community Member Organizations (CMOs) will be able to register a .music address. CMOs will include .music-accredited Trade Organizations, Government Agencies/Export Offices, Music Educational Institutions, Digital Aggregators and Music Communities. It will not be open to the general public like a .COM.
We invite these types of organizations to become .music Community Member Organizations, who will serve as gatekeepers to protect .music from malicious conduct. These CMOs will be assigned a validating ID that will be given to their members to use in order to register a .music domain.
You can email us at community (at) music.us if you are an organization interested in becoming a .music accredited CMO. We will be at Midem, New Music Seminar, Digital Music Forum East and SXSW as well. Contact us via our website http://music.us/contact.htm if you have questions or interest.
Best,
Constantine Roussos
.music Domain Initiative
http://music.us
Because, everybody knows that if you called it .secure it could never be used for anything…questionable.
NEW ICANN TLD
.INFRINGER
ROFL
on the site is nothing but the words
“GOT YA.”
After all these years the RIAA doesn’t have anyone working there that is technical. Huh! Talk about the ostrich with it’s head in the whole.
Re:
Go on… slowly.
Haha
So long as the RIAA exists I will not purchase any music. I WILL download it all, every single bit I can. I WILL distribute it to as many as possible. If I want to support the artists I will show up at their shows, buy their merchandise and support them any way possible.
But I will not do business with the RIAA nor any of their member companies. Simple fact: if no one buys their music they eventually run out of money. When they run out of money the lawyers will quit and go somewhere to work where they do.
DONT BUY MUSIC TILL THE RIAA IS DEFUNCT.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Only members of approved .music Community Member Organizations (CMOs) will be able to register a .music address.
Wait, seriously? I had no idea.
It’s a shame. I’m a musician, but not a member of any of your “communities,” so I’m left out in the cold.
Go ahead and do it your way. Nobody will ever go to a .music domain, but go ahead anyway.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Nobody will ever go to a .music domain
You know, I just went to music.us, and it’s even worse than I thought.
It looks basically like a TLD that is made for the Big Four and PRO members, and nobody else.
One of its stated goals is “fighting piracy.” Roussos is also the founder of http://www.fightpiracy.org (which, I admit, is not quite as bad as it sounds).
It also says this:
Since PRO’s are “not-for-profit organizations,” you get three guesses where that money is going.
And on his own site, he has an article called Why the Music Industry needs a .MUSIC Official Website Domain Name. This is his number one reason for a .music TLD:
Emphasis in the original.
This is not something I would ever want to be associated with.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Karl,
Thank you for your insights and comments. Perhaps Google or Apple is the savior of the music industry but unfortunately it seems that over the last decade, this has not happened while billions have been earned piggybacking the music community. I also added 19 other reasons how .music can be beneficial.
You will also be pleased to know that you are critical to the success of .music since you are a musician and hence a member of the .music community. We will not allow the exclusion of legitimate small bands or music bloggers. The policies for small bands and music bloggers will be incorporated. We also have been developing policies surrounding .music fan websites as well. We will not being excluding members of the at-large music community and a process will be in place to validate themselves and register a .music domain. The CMOs will be diverse, so rest assured, you will be represented as well.
The .music community will be highly inclusive for music constituents. It is so inclusive for the music community that we are also working towards International Domain Names for .music to facilitate the music community from regions with languages in Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Hindi etc.
In other words, we will be vying for the internalization of the music space on the Internet. The .music initiative will cater to the needs of a culturally-diverse global music community. Besides English/Latin, .MUSIC will also be translated and launched in 8 other languages, including French (.musique), Germanic (.musik), Hindi, Russian (.музыка), Japanese (音楽), Korean (음악), Arabic and Chinese (.音乐).
Check http://music.us/innovation.htm for more info. Our goal is truly innovate the space and keep it exclusive to the music community and not cybersquatters or pirates.
We are committed to our original mission of adding value to the music community, bring new innovation, facilitate collaboration as well as make the TLD truly internationalized. Win-win is the objective and unity in vision and execution. For that all constituents will benefit by participating and engage positively for the greater good of the industry. In actuality, the exclusion of members of the music community is exactly what we are striving against.
The goal of .MUSIC is not just launching a vanity TLD but creating an ecosystem that is secure, collaborative and works for the benefit of the at-large music community. We believe music can be as strong as a country-code TLD and strike a chord for musicians and the music community. Like .DK associates the Danish and is the TLD of choice in Denmark, the .MUSIC will be the association for a TLD of choice for the music community.
The benefit of the .MUSIC we are championing is that it will serve as a trusted badge with policies that outlaw piracy and cybersquatting. Consumers will be able to trust a .MUSIC domains as opposed to a .COM which lacks the policies to prevent piracy.
For the past few years or so I have also been quite vocal about ICANN allowing Vertical Integration of Registries/Registrars so that a new TLD can innovate and compete against the .COM monopoly. I lobbied ICANN for this quite extensively and since it was consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments to increase competition and bring innovation in the domain space, the ICANN Board voted to allow this. You might be right if you are playing by the old rules of domaining.
We will be offering an extensive set of data to the music community that can be collected at the macro level. This can help predict trends, improve decision making as well as for statistical purposes. Sort of like a Big Champagne but using the DNS. The other is our patent-pending DNS platform that we built to power the .MUSIC premium domains that will be .MUSIC registrant-generated. This will help .MUSIC registrants with marketing, gaining search traffic, for discovery as well as social connectedness and collaboration.
As mentioned earlier, we will differentiate from .COM by enabling Internationalized participation by launching International Domain Names for .music to facilitate the music community from regions with languages in Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Hindi etc. In other words, we will be vying for the internalization of the music space on the Internet. The .music initiative will cater to the needs of a culturally-diverse global music community. Besides English/Latin, .MUSIC will also be translated and launched in 8 other languages, including French (.musique), Germanic (.musik), Hindi, Russian (.музыка), Japanese (音楽), Korean (음악), Arabic and Chinese (.音乐).
We have built a host of tools and technology to facilitate this to ensure that a .MUSIC will be a stronger value proposition than a .COM for the music community. Not only that, it will serve as a tool for expanding the pie for the music industry and not a nuisance. We stick to our commitment to build this and employ this for the music community and serve their interests.
Thank you for your comments. They are very important. Rest assured you and other musicians that are not represented by major label or PRO interests will be able to register a .music. Rest assured there will be a process and we strive for equality, transparency and creating value for all music community members.
If you have any concerns or feedback, feel free to email me. My email is on the Music.us contact page. Thank you for taking the time to reading about what we are doing. The majority of the support we received in our 1.5 million signatures are from people such as yourself. I have a commitment to serve the community and will do so. Equal representation and multi-stakeholder governance is in our mission statement.
Constantine Roussos
.music Domain Initiative
http://music.us
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Constantine:
I will be writing you in private, but I thought I’d reply here in the comments as well.
Perhaps Google or Apple is the savior of the music industry but unfortunately it seems that over the last decade, this has not happened while billions have been earned piggybacking the music community.
You’re not going to get very far with this attitude – not with me, nor with any artists here on Techdirt. If Apple and Google have made money from music, it’s not by “piggybacking” off the music community, it’s by adding value to the music. Those sorts of accusations are made almost exclusively by record industry executives, who failed at creating that added value on their own, and now want a piece of the pie without having to actually do any work. It’s the record labels who are “piggybacking” off of Apple and Google.
Now, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with taking control of your online presence, or breaking out of proprietary restrictions. But getting brownie points by attacking successful buisnesses is a terrible idea, in my opinion. It shouldn’t have been on that list at all, and especially not at #1.
We will not allow the exclusion of legitimate small bands or music bloggers.
That is good to hear. I am sort of curous how you will handle this, though. I will write you for the details.
The benefit of the .MUSIC we are championing is that it will serve as a trusted badge with policies that outlaw piracy and cybersquatting.
Fighting cybersquatting is A-OK by me. But outlawing “piracy” is problematic, to say the least. Would Negativland get a TLD? How about Girl Talk? What about DJ’s who post their sets online? All of these people have been called “pirates” by the music industry. I’m also curious how you could tell a “legitimate” music blogger from an “illegitimate” one – especially since record labels, and for that matter ICE, can’t seem to tell the difference themselves.
Furthermore, there’s been a lot of nonsense thrown about in the industry (especially from RIAA clients or ASCAP) about “piracy.” For instance, claiming that Creative Commons is “against copyright,” or that terrestrial radio is “a kind of piracy.” I would not want to support (or indeed have anything to do with) a mindset like this.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Thanks for the comment Karl.
I have great admiration with what Google and Apple’s Steve Jobs have done. Without a doubt they have added significant value for consumers. I use Google and their services and the same applies with Apple. Great products, great leadership and great execution. The value creation for consumers has been huge. From YouTube to search to the iPod and the iPhone and to the Apps, what they accomplished is second to none.
As a musician myself, I understand that there is always a trade off to everything. However, I am not one of those that believes that free is always the solution to selling more. It all depends on which stage of the development cycle you are. Radiohead and Trent have shown great insights on how the web can be leveraged with the concept of free. However, those are big-time names and it is harder to translate those kind of benefits to smaller bands.
Apple has recorded record profits because they are a great company that has served the marked with their strategy with unparalleled execution. Google as well is the market leader in search by a wide margin. It is not even close. Same applies to youtube in the video market, even though Vevo has made very optimistic strides.
My perspective is that more could be done in regards to distributing more equitable/fair funds of those profits to artists. Music is used as a loss leader to sell a lot of electronics and advertising. Music has been used as a loss leader on Youtube to sell ads. It is now that we might have some more beneficial treatment towards artists in regards to fair compensation. I think artists are part of the value generation of these companies and they have not benefited as much as they could.
Same applies to terrestrial radio in the US. I believe performers should be paid their fair share by the radio stations. Pandora and digital stations pay for it, why shouldn’t terrestrial radio. The record industry has changed and so have the dynamics of marketing.
The system is broken and I believe it is our responsibility to ensure that artists can be represented in the best way possible to earn a living and be fairly compensated. I believe the RIAA and others have received a lot of criticism but I do believe they play an important role in lobbying for the music industry. The music community plays a vital role and I believe those voices must be heard too.
I believe asking the tough questions and answering them with a win-win scenario is the ultimate goal. How do we reach that objective is the difficult journey. We require more trust, collaboration and creating win-win situations.
I hope we can look at all the issues and iron them out so they can best reflect the interests of the music community at-large. You and others have a voice and as a member of the music community, I believe we all need to be a bit more pro-active in regards to musicians’ rights and fair compensation. Increasing competition and innovation is a must. It has to be done for the benefit of both commercial and non-commercial music constituents.
Thank you for your comments again.
Constantine Roussos
.music TLD
http://music.us
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
Nice of you to outline this here, Constantine.
But please remember, your commenting on a blog where the denizens are those who wish to take without contributing anything in return.
wink wink 🙂
cheers,
Anonymous
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
The above is a lie.
Response by .music domain initiative: Roussos
“However, I am not one of those that believes that free is always the solution to selling more. It all depends on which stage of the development cycle you are. Radiohead and Trent have shown great insights on how the web can be leveraged with the concept of free. However, those are big-time names and it is harder to translate those kind of benefits to smaller bands.”
Why? This issue has been discussed on Techdirt repeatedly and no one seems to be able to explain why it could only work for already successful bands, let alone provided any evidence to support the theory.
“My perspective is that more could be done in regards to distributing more equitable/fair funds of those profits to artists.”
Isn’t that battle better fought against the labels themselves? Plenty of independent artists seem to be perfectly happy with the services offered by Youtube and iTunes. I happen to think people using iTunes are insane and prefer them to use better services like Bandcamp, but to suggest that iTunes is exploiting them just doesn’t make sense to me. Incidentally, what problem do you have with iTunes that couldn’t be solved by artists utilising competing services; is it because no one can afford to set up internet radio, iTunes has become the de facto promotional tool?
“Same applies to terrestrial radio in the US. I believe performers should be paid their fair share by the radio stations. Pandora and digital stations pay for it, why shouldn’t terrestrial radio. The record industry has changed and so have the dynamics of marketing.”
Because the industry almost killed Pandora by insisting on excessive royalties. When I was growing up the only reason I bought any music was because I had heard it on the radio. Now the technology has changed and instead of supporting the technical progression of one of the biggest contributors to the growth of the music industry, they want to tax it. There was a time when labels paid stations to play their music, why does it suddenly make more sense to tax them for the privilege? The ‘dynamics of marketing’? I guess I’m not hip with the lingo.
“We are concerned that a music themed TLD will be used to enable wide scale copyright and trademark infringement.”
Wait, I’m confused. Are they arguing, then, that there isn’t already wide scale copyright and trademark infringement?