by Mike Masnick
Wed, Aug 12th 2009 8:22pm
Rose M. Welch alerts us to a court case where two law firms are fighting over a copied web page. There seems to be no question at all that the website of one law firm used almost an exact copy of some text from another law firm's website. So that would make it a pretty clear cut case. But... there's a bit of a complication. The law firm who used the copied content didn't realize the content was copied. It had hired an outside firm to build the website, and someone at that firm copied the content in creating the website. An arbiter ruled that the development firm was 2/3 responsible, but that the law firm was still 1/3 responsible, and the case has now shifted from arbitration to court. The problem is that it still seems difficult to see why the law firm should be liable at all. The folks they hired to create the website did the actual copying, and the law firm had no idea. So why should they take the blame?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- US Court Rules That Kim Dotcom Is A 'Fugitive' And Thus DOJ Can Take His Money
- Paypal Cuts Off Mega Because It Actually Keeps Your Files Secret
- Have You Been Debating What Color Some Random Dress Is All Day? Thank Fair Use
- Despite Lack Of Evidence It Will Help, Australia Still Planning To Bring In Data Retention, Still Not Clear If It Could Be Used Against Copyright Infringement
- As Blurred Lines Trial Starts, Take A Listen To The Special 'Copyright Only' Remix That Jurors Will Hear