Nate Anderson reports for ARS Technica: "A federal judge yesterday found Usenet.com liable for just about every copyright infringement claim on the books: direct infringement, inducement of infringement, contributory infringement, and (just for good measure) vicarious infringement. Not content to be loud and proud about its pro-pirate agenda, Usenet.com also resorted to stonewalling legal questionnaires, sending employees to Europe to avoid depositions, wiping hard drives, and failing to turn over e-mail after being sued in 2007 by the music labels."
Nate Anderson reports for ARS Technica: "A federal judge yesterday found Usenet.com liable for just about every copyright infringement claim on the books: direct infringement, inducement of infringement, contributory infringement, and (just for good measure) vicarious infringement. Not content to be loud and proud about its pro-pirate agenda, Usenet.com also resorted to stonewalling legal questionnaires, sending employees to Europe to avoid depositions, wiping hard drives, and failing to turn over e-mail after being sued in 2007 by the music labels."
Hey, wait a minute. Isn't Usenet.com Jerry Reynolds? The guy who went after anti-spam activist David Ritz for using common spam fighting tools like "host" and "whois"? (Note to self: Don't try to acquire or use free, legal and common unix utilities in North Dakota.) Why yes, yes indeed.
I've been eagerly awaiting the outcome of this case ever since I first heard about it. All I've got to say now is: Karma can be a real bitch sometimes, huh? Find the court documents here.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments policy: Al is always right. Kidding, mostly. Be polite, please and thank you.