4 ms·
> There's no way the cops doing this on duty have the music licensed that for non-personal use. States are immune from copyright infringement: https://www.npr
by js2 5y ago
> There's no way the cops doing this on duty have the music licensed that for non-personal use.
States are immune from copyright infringement:
https://www.npr.org/2020/03/24/820381016/in-blackbeard-pirate-ship-case-supreme-court-scuttles-copyright-claims https://www.npr.org/2020/03/24/820381016/in-blackbeard-pirat...
- akudha 5y agoSupreme Court has ruled that in general individuals cannot sue sovereign states without their permission in federal court Can someone explain why this is the case?
- colinmhayes 5y ago11th amendment.
- _jal 5y agoMunicipalities do not enjoy the same freedom from responsibility. Also, federal copyright preemption only covers "equivalent" laws. So, for instance, state "true name and address" laws could still be used.
- savant_penguin 5y agoI'm absolutely ignorant about those rules, but couldn't you sue the individual cop?
- suresk 5y ago(un)qualified immunity makes this really hard.
- olliej 5y agoMy understanding is it only applies if the officer believes they aren’t violating the law? Given the explicit goal is triggering copyright enforcement that seems to negate such a claim?
- suresk 5y agoQualified Immunity has been interpreted so broadly that it is virtually unqualified - it is almost impossible to actually bring a case against a police officer for something that happens while they are on duty. General incompetence and ignorance of the law have been used as justification for invoking qualified immunity. I'd be willing to bet there is almost no chance of successfully suing a police officer over something like this.
- olliej 5y agoYeah, and similarly they've been found to not be required to "protect and serve" :-/