3 ms·

Hadn't actually dug into the ToS, but the bit: > You also expressly grant and assign to CL all rights and causes of action to prohibit and enforce against any

by debacle 14y ago

Hadn't actually dug into the ToS, but the bit: > You also expressly grant and assign to CL all rights and causes of action to prohibit and enforce against any unauthorized copying, performance, display, distribution... Seems to be vital to this case.

learc83 14y ago
Rightshaven (copyright troll) was granted the same right by the copyright holders they represent, yet the judge ruled they didn't have standing to sue on the copyright holder's behalf.
- natrius 14y ago
  The Righthaven case is slightly different, though I hope the logic still applies. (I'm not a lawyer, but I read the Righthaven opinion[1] when the Padmapper/3Taps workaround was originally discussed.) The difference is that Righthaven was granted merely the right to sue on behalf of the original copyright holder, but none of the exclusive rights that copyrights actually bestow upon their owners. It could be interpreted that posters grant Craigslist some of their exclusive rights ("copy, perform, display," etc.), and suing to protect those rights may be legally kosher. I know of no such precedent. My personal interpretation/hope is that the right to sue for copyright infringement is nontransferable, which would give Craigslist no standing to sue. Individual posters could sue, however. [1] https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/righthaven_v_dem/order6-14-11.pdf https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/righthaven_v_dem/order6-1... (See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righthaven_LLC_v._Democratic_Underground_LLC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righthaven_LLC_v._Democratic_Un...)
  - learc83 14y ago
    The judge in the Righthaven case said this... "Because the SAA (lawsuit contract) prevents Righthaven from obtaining any of the exclusive rights necessary to maintain standing in a copyright infringement action, the court finds that Righthaven lacks standing in this case," Craigslist ToS doesn't grant them exclusive rights, thus by that definition they don't have standing to sue.
fleitz 14y ago
Yes, the key point would be unauthorized, CL is going to have to prove that the PadMapper's usage was unauthorized (by the owner of the data)
- dangrossman 14y ago
  That's a given. The only way they'd have authorization by the owners of the data would be to e-mail the poster of every CL listing and ask for it. We know they don't do that. The key point is whether there's copyright infringement at all, not whether it was authorized.
dredmorbius 14y ago
CL revised their TOU recently (within the past year, possibly more recently than that). It wasn't a minor edit, it was a complete rewrite. I suspect this may have been one of the introduced terms.
bascule 14y ago
Then Craigslist should ban Google from indexing their pages

by debacle 14y ago

learc83 14y ago

Rightshaven (copyright troll) was granted the same right by the copyright holders they represent, yet the judge ruled they didn't have standing to sue on the copyright holder's behalf.

natrius 14y ago
The Righthaven case is slightly different, though I hope the logic still applies. (I'm not a lawyer, but I read the Righthaven opinion[1] when the Padmapper/3Taps workaround was originally discussed.) The difference is that Righthaven was granted merely the right to sue on behalf of the original copyright holder, but none of the exclusive rights that copyrights actually bestow upon their owners. It could be interpreted that posters grant Craigslist some of their exclusive rights ("copy, perform, display," etc.), and suing to protect those rights may be legally kosher. I know of no such precedent. My personal interpretation/hope is that the right to sue for copyright infringement is nontransferable, which would give Craigslist no standing to sue. Individual posters could sue, however. [1] https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/righthaven_v_dem/order6-14-11.pdf https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/righthaven_v_dem/order6-1... (See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righthaven_LLC_v._Democratic_Underground_LLC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righthaven_LLC_v._Democratic_Un...)
- learc83 14y ago
  The judge in the Righthaven case said this... "Because the SAA (lawsuit contract) prevents Righthaven from obtaining any of the exclusive rights necessary to maintain standing in a copyright infringement action, the court finds that Righthaven lacks standing in this case," Craigslist ToS doesn't grant them exclusive rights, thus by that definition they don't have standing to sue.

fleitz 14y ago

Yes, the key point would be unauthorized, CL is going to have to prove that the PadMapper's usage was unauthorized (by the owner of the data)

dangrossman 14y ago
That's a given. The only way they'd have authorization by the owners of the data would be to e-mail the poster of every CL listing and ask for it. We know they don't do that. The key point is whether there's copyright infringement at all, not whether it was authorized.

dredmorbius 14y ago

CL revised their TOU recently (within the past year, possibly more recently than that). It wasn't a minor edit, it was a complete rewrite. I suspect this may have been one of the introduced terms.

bascule 14y ago

Then Craigslist should ban Google from indexing their pages