3 ms·

SCOTUS has ruled that creating a program who's purpose is to circumvent copyright, is a violation. > Held: One who distributes a device with the object of prom

SCOTUS has ruled that creating a program who's purpose is to circumvent copyright, is a violation. > Held: One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge of third-party action, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses. source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-480.ZS.html https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-480.ZS.html

fennecfoxen 7y ago
But is it a violation that you sue about, or a violation that you are entitled to take down with a DMCA notice?
- koheripbal 7y ago
  The title is incorrect - there was no DMCA notice.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
CWuestefeld 7y ago
SCOTUS has ruled that creating a program who's purpose is to circumvent copyright, is a violation. This doesn't contradict the claim you're responding to. It may well be that Popcorn Time is illegal by way of contributing to copyright abuse, as you claim. But that doesn't make a DMCA claim the correct tool for taking it down. As was said earlier, a DMCA claim specifically asserts ownership of the IP in question, and that is clearly not applicable here. So sure, there's probably some tool that could be used to get it removed, but DMCA is not it. I'd guess they'd need some kind of more general cease and desist.
- koheripbal 7y ago
  ...which is there was no DMCA in this situation. The title is wrong. They didn't file a DMCA claim.
  - Gaelan 7y ago
    …what? The repository [0] shows up as "unavailable due to DMCA takedown," and links to a notice [1] that explicitly references the DMCA. [0]: https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-desktop https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-desktop [1]: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-01-MPA.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-0...
    - koheripbal 7y ago
      That's because Github doesn't have a different message for non-DMCA threats of lawsuits. If you look at one of the other top-level comments, you'll see that they didn't actually get a DMCA takedown - but a threatening lawyers letter.
crististm 7y ago
Probably we should go on the negative recipes then, the way they did back during prohibition (e.g "do not do that with this solution")
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

fennecfoxen 7y ago

But is it a violation that you sue about, or a violation that you are entitled to take down with a DMCA notice?

koheripbal 7y ago
The title is incorrect - there was no DMCA notice.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

CWuestefeld 7y ago

SCOTUS has ruled that creating a program who's purpose is to circumvent copyright, is a violation. This doesn't contradict the claim you're responding to. It may well be that Popcorn Time is illegal by way of contributing to copyright abuse, as you claim. But that doesn't make a DMCA claim the correct tool for taking it down. As was said earlier, a DMCA claim specifically asserts ownership of the IP in question, and that is clearly not applicable here. So sure, there's probably some tool that could be used to get it removed, but DMCA is not it. I'd guess they'd need some kind of more general cease and desist.

koheripbal 7y ago
...which is there was no DMCA in this situation. The title is wrong. They didn't file a DMCA claim.
- Gaelan 7y ago
  …what? The repository [0] shows up as "unavailable due to DMCA takedown," and links to a notice [1] that explicitly references the DMCA. [0]: https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-desktop https://github.com/popcorn-official/popcorn-desktop [1]: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-01-MPA.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-0...
  - koheripbal 7y ago
    That's because Github doesn't have a different message for non-DMCA threats of lawsuits. If you look at one of the other top-level comments, you'll see that they didn't actually get a DMCA takedown - but a threatening lawyers letter.

crististm 7y ago

Probably we should go on the negative recipes then, the way they did back during prohibition (e.g "do not do that with this solution")

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]