2 ms·
It should be noted that that's just one part of her case (and she's the plaintiff). The other parts include the defendant harassing her for downloads that supp
by redthrowaway 15y ago
It should be noted that that's just one part of her case (and she's the plaintiff). The other parts include the defendant harassing her for downloads that supposedly occurred before the film was released, failure on the defendant's part to mitigate damages through the DMCA, the defendant purposefully setting up honeypots to catch infringers (but putting the work out there in the first place in the process), and others. Her claim is not limited to the inadmissibility of porn as copyrightable material.