defense for pple sued by odex?

[yoshi27]

I think the law is very clear in that the reproduction and distribution of copyrighted material without licence from the copyright holders is considered an infringing act. It is also illegal (i.e., the commission thereof constitutes an offence) in certain circumstances.

If Odex is the exclusive licensee of the anime titles, it may bring an action against persons who have allegedly downloaded titles to which it owns the exclusive licence. For those who did not download Odex titles, but are served a letter of demand, Odex has no cause of action against you.

For those who did download Odex titles, Odex can bring an action against you. Whether they can prove their case against you is a question of fact and not law.

If you download titles without licence, whether such titles belong to Odex or otherwise, and the other elements making the act an offence are satisfied, a charge may be made against you by the public prosecutor.

I think deadpixel is saying that under the law, the act of downloading is an infringement against Odex's rights as exclusive licensee. No number of good lawyers can argue against the fact that under the law such act constitutes an infringement.

Also, I do not think he was trying to say that Odex has a good case against the alleged infringers (i.e., Odex possess strong evidence). For those that believe Odex would have a difficult task proving its case - by all means do not bow to their demands. Whether or not it can be proven in court, if one did indeed download the titles, it is an infringement.

 

[CYRN]

I think the law is very clear in that the reproduction and distribution of copyrighted material without licence from the copyright holders is considered an infringing act. It is also illegal (i.e., the commission thereof constitutes an offence) in certain circumstances.

If Odex is the exclusive licensee of the anime titles, it may bring an action against persons who have allegedly downloaded titles to which it owns the exclusive licence. For those who did not download Odex titles, but are served a letter of demand, Odex has no cause of action against you.

For those who did download Odex titles, Odex can bring an action against you. Whether they can prove their case against you is a question of fact and not law.

If you download titles without licence, whether such titles belong to Odex or otherwise, and the other elements making the act an offence are satisfied, a charge may be made against you by the public prosecutor.

I think deadpixel is saying that under the law, the act of downloading is an infringement against Odex's rights as exclusive licensee. No amount of good lawyers can argue against the fact that under the law such act constitutes an infringement.

Also, I do not think he was trying to say that Odex has a good case against the alleged infringers (i.e., Odex possess strong evidence). For those that believe Odex would have a difficult task proving its case - by all means do not bow to their demands. Whether or not it can be proven in court, if one did indeed download the titles, it is an infringement.

best summary. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[eikin]

how will our law prosecute a 9-year old or anyone who is not yet of lawful age for downloading a copyrighted material? :think:

 

[garou12]

how will our law prosecute a 9-year old or anyone who is not yet of lawful age for downloading a copyrighted material? :think:

boys home.:dunno:

 

[eikin]

boys home.:dunno:

:bigeyes:

you discriminating against boys ah? you missed out girls' home :bsmilie:

 

[CYRN]

how will our law prosecute a 9-year old or anyone who is not yet of lawful age for downloading a copyrighted material? :think:

Technically the line subscription should belong to the parent. So that's why they are able to target the parent.... one way of putting it, but I realli dunnoe if it applies in our system. :dunno:

 

[eikin]

Technically the line subscription should belong to the parent. So that's why they are able to target the parent.... one way of putting it, but I realli dunnoe if it applies in our system. :dunno:

so are the parents being faulted for copyright/distribution rights infringement or failure to prevent others (in this case their own kids) from mis-use of the line subscription? i think all these have implications on Odex's claims to damages.

 

[CYRN]

so are the parents being faulted for copyright/distribution rights infringement or failure to prevent others (in this case their own kids) from mis-use of the line subscription? i think all these have implications on Odex's claims to damages.

the thing is neither can the parent prove beyond doubt that it's their kid that does it exclusively.

*eidt* I mean they, the parent, can't really prove their innonence too.

 

[eikin]

the thing is neither can the parent prove beyond doubt that it's their kid that does it exclusively.

but can Odex prove that the parents did it?

say the downloading occurred in a school, committed by a student, is Odex going to sue the school for monetary damages since the line belongs to the school?

 

[yoshi27]

how will our law prosecute a 9-year old or anyone who is not yet of lawful age for downloading a copyrighted material? :think:

Minors are generally considered to lack the mental capacity to commit an offence.

 

[garou12]

Minors are generally considered to lack the mental capacity to commit an offence.

That is up to the courts to decide.

 

[eikin]

Minors are generally considered under the law to lack the mental capacity to commit an offence.

nothing much was disclosed about how Odex won the case against ISPs to get them to disclose customer information. as far as we know from various sources, Odex chooses its targets by considering communication volume and maybe filenames from the data supplied by the ISPs, which puts the subscribers in the position of responsibility. what if the parents can prove that their kids did it, and they have absolutely nothing to do with the downloads except being careless in monitoring their kids' usage, how will these parents be punished under law?

 

[CYRN]

but can Odex prove that the parents did it?

say the downloading occurred in a school, committed by a student, is Odex going to sue the school for monetary damages since the line belongs to the school?

Can't say that such can apply to those publicly shared facilities.

I believe ODEX onli need to prove that your IP at that particular time have been DLing their titles. Which according the the Wiki letter, they have such prove.

I believe yoshi27 already stated, cannot go after minors.

It's another grey area to be sorted out, I guess. :dunno:

 

[CYRN]

That is up to the courts to decide.

But would that be in sub. court or juv. court. Will that make any difference?

 

[eikin]

Can't say that such can apply to those publicly shared facilities.

I believe ODEX onli need to prove that your IP at that particular time have been DLing their titles. Which according the the Wiki letter, they have such prove.

I believe yoshi27 already stated, cannot go after minors.

It's another grey area to be sorted out, I guess. :dunno:

well, schools can just say that prominent signs are in place and the student users have been educated that using public facilities for downloading of copyrighted materials is illegal so the responsibilities lie in the students. but a parent can also say that he or she has warned his/her kid of illegal downloading, i don't think one will find signs stuck on the walls of homes warning the kids of internet downloading :bsmilie:

 

[garou12]

But would that be in sub. court or juv. court. Will that make any difference?

yes, because it could set a legal precedent...now that is dangerous.

 

[CYRN]

i don't think one will find signs stuck on the walls of homes warning the kids of internet downloading :bsmilie:

:sweat::sweat:

I can imagine the screen-saver.... "NO more anime! NO more DLing!". :bigeyes:

 

[eikin]

actually all these questioning are just to find out what kind of a case Odex has, since they are not the authority to prosecute acts of copyright infringement, nor do they own the copyright of the materials in question since they are only a distributor. and technically speaking, i still think AVPAS should be the one taking actions and not Odex, at least AVPAS can be considered a sort of representation of some copyright owners, Odex is only a distributor. although some equate AVPAS to Odex, i believe they have their functional distinction.

 

[garou12]

actually all these questioning are just to find out what kind of a case Odex has, since they are not the authority to prosecute acts of copyright infringement, nor do they own the copyright of the materials in question since they are only a distributor. and technically speaking, i still think AVPAS should be the one taking actions and not Odex, at least AVPAS can be considered a sort of representation of some copyright owners, Odex is only a distributor. although some equate AVPAS to Odex, i believe they have their functional distinction.

well if odex director is on avps isn't that a conflict of interest?

 

[yoshi27]

For criminal offences, the Penal Code provides that nothing done by a child under the age of 7 is an offence.

For a child above age of 7 and under 12, an act would not constitute an offence only if such child has not attained "sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequence of his conduct" - this as garou12 pointed out, will be determined by the courts.

That said, certain minors still may be charged for an offence - and the parents may be ordered to bear the penalties (i.e., fines), if any are imposed.

For civil actions, parents can be liable for the acts of their children.