Re: Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- From: Alex Heney <me8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:11:22 +0000
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:08:06 +1300, Peter <peterwn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>Alex Heney wrote:
>
>>
>> Of course it is a scam.
>>
>> If there *is* any requirement at all for a license to copy newspaper
>> articles, it would be the cuttings service that would have to pay it,
>> not you.
>
>AFAIK it is possible a person who 'uses' works in breach of copyright,
I presume you meant to include the words "to sue" there.
But you would be wrong, unless they can show that the user *knows* the
works in his possession are in breach of copyright, *and* the user is
using them in the course of business.
The only section in the Copyrights, designs and Patents Act relating
to possession is the following.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. The copyright in a work is infringed by a person who, without
the licence of the copyright owner—
(a) possesses in the course of a business,
(b) sells or lets for hire, or offers or exposes for sale or hire,
(c) in the course of a business exhibits in public or distributes, or
(d) distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an
extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,
an article which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe is,
an infringing copy of the work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> the
>copyright holder can aim for who (s)he thinks is the softer and deeper
>pocketed target. Any contract terms between clipping service and user are
>of no concern to the copyright holder with respect as whom should be sued.
>
Of course they are.
The copyright holder will get nowhere attempting to sue the user if
the user honestly believes they have paid for a legitimate copying
service.
>>
>> If they suspect that you are unlawfully copying them yourself, then it
>> is up to them to prove it in court, when they sue you for copyright
>> infringement.
>
>If they are taking civil action under copyright law, they only need to prove
>it on the balance of probabilities, not 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The
>other party does not have any 'right to silence', moreover both parties
>have the right to require the other to produce relevant information (ie
>'discovery').
All correct.
But the point is that they would have to prove it. Which means they
would have to have some evidence that he was further copying them.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Not a computer nerd; merely a techno-weenie.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
.
- References:
- Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- From: Roy Hills
- Re: Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- From: Alex Heney
- Re: Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- From: Peter
- Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- Prev by Date: Re: What puzzles me given my history on UK Legal is
- Next by Date: Re: Police van parked on bus stop
- Previous by thread: Re: Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- Next by thread: Re: Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading