4 ms·

The article touches on that angle: Canipre quickly took on the role of “innocent” infringer and blamed their web design firm for obtaining the photos. The desi

The article touches on that angle: Canipre quickly took on the role of “innocent” infringer and blamed their web design firm for obtaining the photos. The design firm allegedly took content from an image bank, but that would have to be a rogue outfit as Houk never sold away his rights. In any case, Canipre is of course ultimately responsible for the content that appears on their company website, just like they hold an Internet subscriber responsible for the infringing behavior of their neighbors. "At least" with direct commercial copyright infringement, there's something to sue over (the profit made from the sale), but when people go so far as to hold ISPs (including individuals running open hotspots, or routing gateways, or Tor exits - which few people can afford to accept liability for) and online services (like Megaupload and the Pirate Bay which, based on my current understanding, are not selling anything they aren't entitled to, even if one could show they made money off of aggregation; they aren't claiming to have made anything they aggregate), for example - when we are effectively holding intermediaries responsible for other people's behaviour I think something is wrong, and service neutrality is effectively on the block.

kevingadd 13y ago
If anything this is a more clear-cut case of the intermediary bearing responsibility. Even if the design agency is responsible for originally stealing the work, they paid for the design without demanding proof that they actually had the rights to use the design, and they put it up on the internet without having proof that they had those rights. And this is all done to directly enrich themselves. A far cry from 'common carriers' that, despite responding promptly to DMCA takedowns and other requests, still regularly get badgered and legally abused by IP rightsholders.

kevingadd 13y ago

If anything this is a more clear-cut case of the intermediary bearing responsibility. Even if the design agency is responsible for originally stealing the work, they paid for the design without demanding proof that they actually had the rights to use the design, and they put it up on the internet without having proof that they had those rights. And this is all done to directly enrich themselves. A far cry from 'common carriers' that, despite responding promptly to DMCA takedowns and other requests, still regularly get badgered and legally abused by IP rightsholders.