3 ms·
Unfortunately, saying "contract is serious business" helps nobody. Much as it would be nice to not have to encounter any contracts (or even just not obscenely m
by dzaima 3y ago
Unfortunately, saying "contract is serious business" helps nobody. Much as it would be nice to not have to encounter any contracts (or even just not obscenely many) in the modern world, that is just largely not impossible, so people have to deal with it somehow, and it would be nice if that doesn't include random $150000 fines.
I can see an argument for the copyright trolls on it being wilful infringement if there was some attribution but not all of it - clearly the infringer is aware that there must be attribution otherwise there wouldn't be any, but they still ended up infringing; of course a court could still decide either way, but most sane people without millions of disposable money wouldn't risk the $150k if they can pay a couple thousand and be done with it; and either of those can still destroy a person.
- mgaunard 3y agoYou don't really expose yourself to such copyright infringement unless you redistribute somebody else's work. If you're gonna do that, you better make sure you're allowed to and under what conditions.
- inglor_cz 3y ago"If you're gonna do that, you better make sure you're allowed to and under what conditions." That still doesn't justify a 150 000 USD statutory punishment in my view. Banal mistakes should be punished by a banal slap on the wrist.
- mgaunard 3y agoCalling the mistake "banal" is already a judgement call. If the requirement is in the license then presumably whoever emitted the license cared about the clause being respected to the letter.