Personally I think it would be a sad day if Alan is found guilty, though I fear it may be a foregone conclusion - classic case of big player going for a soft target presumably to send out a message or create a precedent case.
I'm no lawyer but if I was his defence I'd probably be looking at his system for removing content when copyright infringements were reported. If this was prompt/efficient then surely that's a mechanism for the protection of copyright within what is otherwise a very grey area?
And how is it different to copyright infringements on Youtube - this relies on the copyright holder to take action and complain - probably less prevalent now but rife back in the oink prime days.
And what about google who actually promote torrents and illegal sites by displaying them in search results? Alan might have taken donations, but this is a huuuuge cash cow for them I would have thought...surely making advertising profit from ads on the searches that "illegal" sharing creates could be construed facilitating access to copyrighted material?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by James.
Sad Day
Personally I think it would be a sad day if Alan is found guilty, though I fear it may be a foregone conclusion - classic case of big player going for a soft target presumably to send out a message or create a precedent case.
I'm no lawyer but if I was his defence I'd probably be looking at his system for removing content when copyright infringements were reported. If this was prompt/efficient then surely that's a mechanism for the protection of copyright within what is otherwise a very grey area?
And how is it different to copyright infringements on Youtube - this relies on the copyright holder to take action and complain - probably less prevalent now but rife back in the oink prime days.
And what about google who actually promote torrents and illegal sites by displaying them in search results? Alan might have taken donations, but this is a huuuuge cash cow for them I would have thought...surely making advertising profit from ads on the searches that "illegal" sharing creates could be construed facilitating access to copyrighted material?