TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › Court Upholds Reposting Entire Article Online Is Fair Use
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Court Upholds Reposting Entire Article Online Is Fair Use

post #1 of 13
6/21/11 at 2:50pm
Thread Starter 
Score one for the Good Guys!

A federal judge ruled Monday that publishing an entire article without the rights holder’s authorization for non-profit commentary online is fair-use:
Quote:
"Righthaven did not present any evidence that the market for the work was harmed by Hoehn’s noncommercial use for the 40 days it appeared on the website. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact that Hoehn’s use of the work was fair and summary judgment is appropriate.

Judge Pro, in his fair-use analysis, also found that the posting was for noncommercial purposes, and was part of an “online discussion.â€
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...r-use-defense/
Reply
post #2 of 13
6/21/11 at 4:06pm
I can just see people quoting this ruling, right before they are thrown off discussion boards and forums all over the internet. Because online, things are often more complex than they may seem.

This case involved a US "litigation" firm, a US news organization, a US author, a US forum and a US poster. All well and good, chalk one up for the good guys.

But to get a bit hypothetical; A forum based in Italy, with a heavy US audience. A US poster quotes an entire article published by the Guardian in the UK, and again under license by the Japan Times Online. That forum can be sued under the copyright laws of any of those countries. Forum owners have to err on the side of caution when they establish their rules for posting on their forums, and adhere to the strictest laws they are apt to encounter. And, as they are the owners, their rules are the rules.

I certainly hope the citizens of the www do their homework on where their quote is coming from and where they are posting it before they run afoul of their favorite boards.
Reply
post #3 of 13
6/22/11 at 4:48am
Thread Starter 
That is 100% false information. A forum can ONLY be sued within the country in which it is hosted under the laws of the hosting country. A forum hosted in Sweden does not have to abide by the laws of any other country. Otherwise ThePirateBay would have been shut down long ago, but international organizations have been heavily petitioning the Swedish government as that is their only recourse.

So a Japanese forum only has to abide by Japanese laws, a US hosted forum by US law, and a British hosted forum by British law. At least until we have the inevitable one-world-government that Big Business is clamoring for.
Reply
post #4 of 13
6/22/11 at 5:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
That is 100% false information. A forum can ONLY be sued within the country in which it is hosted under the laws of the hosting country. A forum hosted in Sweden does not have to abide by the laws of any other country. Otherwise ThePirateBay would have been shut down long ago, but international organizations have been heavily petitioning the Swedish government as that is their only recourse.
Not true. The sticking point on ThePirateBay is the fact that they do not maintain any content themselves. The merely provide a repository of links to the holders of the material. This is still a murky, not yet addressed area under the Berne Convention. Then again, most forums will allow the posting of links to copyrighted articles as well. +

Quote:
So a Japanese forum only has to abide by Japanese laws, a US hosted forum by US law, and a British hosted forum by British law. At least until we have the inevitable one-world-government that Big Business is clamoring for.
All that is required is for the injured party to obtain legal counsel in the country in which they wish to bring suit. Under the Berne Convention, each country must recognize works from other nationalities as they would their own.
Reply
post #5 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:08am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Not true. The sticking point on ThePirateBay is the fact that they do not maintain any content themselves.
Because Swedish law protects that. It is not protected in other countries. Swedish law is all that matters to a Swedish hosted site, and any and all other laws are completely irrelevant and have no jurisdiction.

You are completely misunderstanding the Berne Convention.

There is no contesting that the work is copyright, but the legality of reposting it for commentary purposes. Again, a forum is only subject to lawsuits originating in the country of its hosting by the laws of the hosting country.

If the server is hosted in the United States, no lawsuit can come from Japan as you put it against the forum. The lawsuit would have to be brought within the United States using United States laws, which in this case determines whether or not the reproduction falls under fair-use under American law, not Japanese law. The federal courts have deemed that reproduction for online commentary without financial gain represents fair use in the United States.
Reply
post #6 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:18am
If a forum has rules about posting copyrighted material, it matters not what the laws are. Forums like TCS are privately owned, and the owner/admin can make and enforce their own rules that members agree to follow when they sign up.
Reply
post #7 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:20am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by otto View Post
If a forum has rules about posting copyrighted material, it matters not what the laws are. Forums like TCS are privately owned, and the owner/admin can make and enforce their own rules that members agree to follow when they sign up.
Did anyone claim otherwise? I was merely posting breaking news about a victory for freedom of online communication for US based forums under law.

Odd reaction, as on the other three forums I frequent, this news was met with quite a bit of applause.
Reply
post #8 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Because Swedish law protects that. It is not protected in other countries. Swedish law is all that matters to a Swedish hosted site, and any and all other laws are completely irrelevant and have no jurisdiction.

You are completely misunderstanding the Berne Convention.

There is no contesting that the work is copyright, but the legality of reposting it for commentary purposes. Again, a forum is only subject to lawsuits originating in the country of its hosting by the laws of the hosting country.

If the server is hosted in the United States, no lawsuit can come from Japan as you put it against the forum. The lawsuit would have to be brought within the United States using United States laws, which in this case determines whether or not the reproduction falls under fair-use under American law, not Japanese law. The federal courts have deemed that reproduction for online commentary without financial gain represents fair use in the United States.
So, using your reasoning, let's use The Cat Site as an example. The host is located in California, yet the site, it's forums, the rules governing the forums, advertising, everything; is controlled under direction of it's owner, who is an Israeli citizen, living full time in Israel. So, US law, and therefore this ruling, would have no bearing at all then? It would have to follow Israel's copyright laws, correct?
Reply
post #9 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Did anyone claim otherwise? I was merely posting breaking news about a victory for freedom of online communication for US based forums under law.

Odd reaction, as on the other three forums I frequent, this news was met with quite a bit of applause.
It's because it's a ruling for all practical purposes simply against a mercenary copyright firm. Overall, it has little meaning other than that. Fair use is determined on a case by case basis.
Reply
post #10 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:31am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
So, using your reasoning, let's use The Cat Site as an example. The host is located in California, yet the site, it's forums, the rules governing the forums, advertising, everything; is controlled under direction of it's owner, who is an Israeli citizen, living full time in Israel. So, US law, and therefore this ruling, would have no bearing at all then? It would have to follow Israel's copyright laws, correct?
Ah, I thought the forum was hosted in the UK.

What do you mean "my reasoning"? I don't invent laws, I wish! LOL! This isn't a matter of opinion, but of law. If the host is located in California, this site would only be subject to US law. The location of the owner is completely irrelevant in that respect. If a US lawsuit were brought against the site, it could be shut down, and the owner liable for whatever damages under US law. If outside of the country, there would be no way to enforce it, such as in a recent case where a US court gave decision to a plaintiff regarding piracy of a Canadian user. Unless the Canadian moves to the United States prior to the statute of limitations, its pretty meaningless.

In any case, I did not mean to evoke such a defensive and hostile reaction by posting positive news about US courts. *scratching head* I guess I'll stick to internet related news to my tech forums. *tip toes away*
Reply
post #11 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Ah, I thought the forum was hosted in the UK.

What do you mean "my reasoning"? I don't invent laws, I wish! LOL! This isn't a matter of opinion, but of law. If the host is located in California, this site would only be subject to US law. The location of the owner is completely irrelevant in that respect. If a US lawsuit were brought against the site, it could be shut down, and the owner liable for whatever damages under US law. If outside of the country, there would be no way to enforce it, such as in a recent case where a US court gave decision to a plaintiff regarding piracy of a Canadian user. Unless the Canadian moves to the United States prior to the statute of limitations, its pretty meaningless.

In any case, I did not mean to evoke such a defensive reaction by posting positive news about US courts.
That's because you're reading the question backwards.

The owner DOES have to abide by the more stringent copyright laws of their home country, even if over 50% of the sites audience are from an area where the laws are more lax, such as in the case of fair use. You're concentrating on enforcement, while I'm referring to the laws that must be observed by the owner(s).
Reply
post #12 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:45am
Thread Starter 
You're entitled to your opinion, but everything I know of copyright law is that there are only TWO things that matter:
1) What country is the server hosted in.
2) What country is the domain registered under.

If you are hosting in the United States, you are subject to any United States law that pertain specifically to hosting a server.

If you are registered in Kenya, you are subject to any Kenyan law that pertains specifically to hosting.

Your customers are responsible for abiding by the laws in their own home country. If Saudi Arabia bans posting images of a woman's hair online, and you post yourself on an American "rate my bikini" website, only that customer is subject to Saudi Arabian law, not the site. And yes, I'm an administrator of my own small forum, and moderate a very large one.

In any case, I have shared the news, twist it and interpret it to your liking. I surely wasn't sharing because I was longing to enter a legal debate. Take it for what it is, I'm out.
Reply
post #13 of 13
6/22/11 at 6:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
You're entitled to your opinion, but everything I know of copyright law is that there are only TWO things that matter:
1) What country is the server hosted in.
2) What country is the domain registered under.

If you are hosting in the United States, you are subject to any United States law that pertain specifically to hosting a server.

If you are registered in Kenya, you are subject to any Kenyan law that pertains specifically to hosting.
Unless the injured party wants to obtain a lawyer in the owner's home country and bring suit under the Berne Convention, under which copyrighted works from other nations are given like protection as works from it's own citizens.

Quote:
Your customers are responsible for abiding by the laws in their own home country.

If Saudi Arabia bans posting images of a woman's hair online, and you post yourself on an American "rate my bikini" website, only that customer is subject to Saudi Arabian law, not the site. And yes, I'm an administrator of my own small forum, and moderate a very large one.
Then how is it the very article you posted stated that this lawsuit factory had successfully sued hundreds of websites??? There must be a great many courts reading different rules than you are.

Quote:
In any case, I have shared the news, twist it and interpret it to your liking. I surely wasn't sharing because I was longing to enter a legal debate. Take it for what it is, I'm out.
Out of answers already?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Breaking Mews
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › Court Upholds Reposting Entire Article Online Is Fair Use