[148712] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Illegal content" (Re: Megaupload.com seized)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Fri Jan 20 14:09:50 2012
To: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:46:51 CST."
<201201201846.q0KIkpR2044821@mail.r-bonomi.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:07:29 -0500
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1327086449_4296P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:46:51 CST, Robert Bonomi said:
> Sorry, but the last sentence is simply _not_ true. If the making of the
> copy was a violation of 17 USC 106 (1) or (2), it's existance is proscribed
> by law.
Nice try, but reading 17 USC 503 (b) we see:
"As part of a final judgment or decree, the court may order the destruction or
other reasonable disposition of all copies or phonorecords found to have been
made or used in violation of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, and
of all plates, molds, matrices, masters, tapes, film negatives, or other
articles by means of which such copies or phonorecords may be reproduced."
Note - the court *may* order the destruction. It's not mandatory. And there's
no implied mandatory destruction elsewhere - if there was, 503(b) wouldn't need
to exist because the destruction would already be required, so a court couldn't
order additional destruction.
--==_Exmh_1327086449_4296P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFPGbtxcC3lWbTT17ARAsK/AJ9YQamwhnUx2v1DzfHaIh1bjZUJbgCeNmcw
7fX6vioHJca+Bx9omlIgYwg=
=8095
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1327086449_4296P--
