Atlantis
"the Watchtower just had a case with Facebook. I think the Watchtower won that case",
Is it possible to know the details of that case ? And what winning the case actually meant $$$ wise for either side , if any .?
WT-Closing In On 50 Subpoenas!
by Atlantis 22 Replies latest jw friends
-
smiddy3
-
avoidjw
@atlantis: Thank you for informing people about these subpoenas.
@smiddy3: This wasn’t a case in the strictest sense. Under the DMCA law, Facebook has to hand over all identifying information of an alleged copyright infringer unless they have a lawful reason not to. Once they agreed to handing it over, Watchtower received nothing monetarily.
@Everyone: Copyright law is quite a complex area of law. There is a lot of misunderstanding of what is going on, what rights watchtower has, and what rights alleged infringers have. Let me explain some things about copyright, as simply as I possibly can.
Without putting too fine a point on it, Everything anyone creates is protected by copyright, whether or not you publish it, whether or not you register it.
When it comes to an alleged infringer publishing that copyrighted content prior to the copyright holder publishing it, that’s frustrating Watchtower. The rightfulness or wrongfulness in so doing can be discussed at length but ultimately it is for the courts to decide and whether any or all of it falls under ‘fair use’.
What’s the difference between copyright and registered copyright?
As stated, all material is subject to copyright. However, if your materials are registered with the copyright office, you benefit from additional statutory rights. By way of example:
You have written a book. You registered it with the copyright office. You sell it on Amazon as an ebook for $10. Someone downloads your book and starts reselling it for $5. You find out and sue him. If the court determines that he has infringed on your copyright, because you have registered your copyright, along with recouping money for lost earnings, money that he made and money for court costs, you are also awarded statutory damages of between $750 up to a maximum of $150k.
Watchtower have not registered their copyrights so cannot claim statutory damages. They can claim loss of earnings ($0), money made by infringer ($0) and court costs (this is the only area where there is a cost and even if WT were to win such a case, courts don’t always make the loser pay).
Now you might be thinking, why don’t Watchtower retrospectively register their copyrights? They need to do so within 3 months of publication. In other words, they can’t register most if their publications now. It means all alleged infringements on Faithleaks are exempt from statutory damages.
Folks who allegedly infringe on Watchtower’s Copyright do not do it for financial gain. In fact, most alleged infringers would rather have nothing to do with Watchtower’s publications. It’s a form of protest. And it is a form of protest that works very well.
Watchtower are following a path we paved and may they continue down it.
-
jwleaks
I concur with avoidjw.
I believe that satisfies the Watch Tower’s “two witness” rule.