It just occurred to me that it is necessary but not sufficient to say that there is no DMCA infringement without Copyright infringement. Imagine you are the RIAA, and you find a teeny tiny Copyright infringement, with a peppercorn penalty, BUT this gives you the opening you need to intimidate and/or bankrupt the victim with an overwhelming DMCA action. I think we have to lobby for the DMCA consequences to be exactly proportional to the Copyright consequences IN ADDITION TO no DMCA infringement without Copyright infringement. (Actually, the second part is a logical implication of the first part, but spelling it out can't hurt). Maybe some additional words to say there is no blow back would be good: the judge can't consider the RIAA's DMCA agenda while deliberating the alleged Copyright infringement. The sequence needs to be strict: Copyright *then* DMCA. Or have better minds than mine already thought of this? -- Regards Peter Miller <millerp@canb.auug.org.au> /\/\* http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~millerp/ PGP public key ID: 1024D/D0EDB64D fingerprint = AD0A C5DF C426 4F03 5D53 2BDB 18D8 A4E2 D0ED B64D See http://www.keyserver.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part