[CLUE-Talk] More on SCO/Copyrights

[Matthew Porter]

On 11 Aug 2003 08:46:58 -0600
"Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier" <jzb at dissociatedpress.net> wrote:

> I'd like to know -- can it be considered "willful" if the
> copyright holder refuses to prove their claims?
> 
> If J.K. Rowling says pages 10-40 of one of the Harry Potter
> books are being copied without her permission, you can look and
> say "yup, those are the pages. I'd better quit." In this case,
> anyone can say "that's my copyrighted material. No, I won't
> prove it, but you'd better stop on my say-so." If that's held
> to be legal, you could easily throw a monkey-wrench into *any*
> company's distribution of software -- including Microsoft's
> just by claiming that their software contains your copyrighted
> code. 
> 

I'd say that SCO's refusal to reveal or precisely describe the
allegedly infringing material is not good for their case.  *At
the very least* they are foregoing an opportunity to mitigate the
alleged damage, and courts generally don't like that.

 --Matt.

----------------------
Matthew F. Porter
Golden, Colorado

mfporter at c-creature.com

standard_disclaimer:  IAAL, but nothing I post here (and nothing
 anyone says on any mailing list!) should be taken as specific
 legal advice.  I'm just engaging in conversation and offering
 some thoughts based upon experience, but not upon any immediate
 research.  If you believe you may need legal advice, talk to an
 attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.