I post this here publicly so everyone knows whats going on. There is a company out there that is bringing lawsuits against blogs, forums and those who post up news articles publicly WITHOUT warning. Therefore, if you post an article in its entirety here on Elitetrader (which I see commonly done) then you subject yourself to lawsuits as well as put Elitetrader at risk. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/copyright-trolling-for-dollars/ http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/23/more-copyright-lawsuits-filed-over/
Most courts just laugh at these kind of "3rd party" lawsuit businesses. he will be out of biz in 6 months. what a joke!
this is what america is all about...lawyers and law suits..and somebody is saying trading is non productive business? how productive this guy's business? suing somebody on behalf of somebody for sharing the news..very fucking creative.. RIAA is another leech..it's a fucking extortion, no less. i'm glad that they got fucked in the courts... this is fine example of RIAA @ work- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jammie_Thomas just curious-who is paying for RIAA's legal expences? where they got those money from?
They aren't suing for "sharing the news" -- you can do that under fair-use, just post a link and snippets of the article. What they're suing for is <i>stealing copyright-protected content</i> by cut/pasting articles <i>in their entirety</i> and I applaud them for this. Cut/pasting full articles is a terrible practice. It takes eyeballs (and hence the chance to sell ad space) away from the content's owner/creator. It's no different than siphoning gas from your neighbor's car.
It doesnt matter what the courts laugh at...what matters is the time, expense and frustration you go through in defending yourself. A good trial attorney defending you in court is going to cost how much? 300, 400, 1000 an hour?
This website condones the practice of cutting and pasting without links. IN FACT, management suggests that one cuts and pastes articles instead of posting links. I bet this guy would like to see this practice suggested,,,,,,,,
There are a couple guys who do this if they find any images on your website they have copyrighted. Usually they are junk images that may have been on free sites previously so they are widespread on the internet. These guys are just leaches. http://extortionletterinfo.com/
It is a good policy and here is why... Lets say you are a photographer. You spent 10 grand on equipment and countless hours of time in creating these pictures. You also spent time and money in traveling to the specific destination to take the picture. Then there was another expense and time associated with post-processing the picture. You did all that work and spent all that money to create a picture of the Golden Gate Bridge. You then post it to your own personal website. Then someone from a random blog snags the picture, without permission or full attribution, and uses it as the background on their blog. Is that fair?
"Look, there is a $20 bill on the ground!" "Can't be. If there was a $20 bill on the ground, somebody would have already picked it up."