<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Producer Sues BitTorrent Users, But Doesn&#8217;t &#8216;Own&#8217; Copyright</title>
	<atom:link href="https://torrentfreak.com/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://torrentfreak.com/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/</link>
	<description>Breaking File-sharing, Copyright and Privacy News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:11:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Online Global Week in Review 1 October 2010 from IP Think Tank</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-717001</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Online Global Week in Review 1 October 2010 from IP Think Tank]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-717001</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Mick Hague Productions sues BitTorrent users, but doesn’t ‘own’ copyright (TorrentFreak) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mick Hague Productions sues BitTorrent users, but doesn’t ‘own’ copyright (TorrentFreak) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Field Guide to Copyright Trolls &#124; Electronic Frontier Foundation</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-715419</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Field Guide to Copyright Trolls &#124; Electronic Frontier Foundation]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 14:59:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-715419</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] name publicly disclosed, no matter how meritorious their defenses. Mick Haig upped the ante by suing 670 BitTorrent users, and Larry Flynt Publications has gotten in on the act as well. Subpoenas and threat letters are [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] name publicly disclosed, no matter how meritorious their defenses. Mick Haig upped the ante by suing 670 BitTorrent users, and Larry Flynt Publications has gotten in on the act as well. Subpoenas and threat letters are [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Left to chance &#187; A Field Guide to Copyright Trolls</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-715057</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Left to chance &#187; A Field Guide to Copyright Trolls]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 20:02:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-715057</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] name publicly disclosed, no matter how meritorious their defenses. Mick Haig upped the ante by suing 670 BitTorrent users, and Larry Flynt Publications has gotten in on the act as well. Subpoenas and threat letters are [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] name publicly disclosed, no matter how meritorious their defenses. Mick Haig upped the ante by suing 670 BitTorrent users, and Larry Flynt Publications has gotten in on the act as well. Subpoenas and threat letters are [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Not a lawyer but...</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713917</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Not a lawyer but...]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713917</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Strikes me as just a bit odd that the original post was talking about precedent from courts---this judge may have mentioned a prior case, but this rule actually comes straight from the statute rather than caselaw. Section 411 of the Copyright Act: &quot;...no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.&quot;

But to answer @6 and correct what some people here have been assuming, this rule does NOT say that you can&#039;t sue for infringements from before you registered. It just says that you must go about registering before you actually start the lawsuit. Since these days you automatically do have copyright upon creating a work regardless of whether you&#039;ve registered it, once you do register you could sue for earlier infringements. In other words, the registration rule isn&#039;t about whether you own the work, it&#039;s just a special requirement to sue.

But two important caveats on that. First, you can&#039;t seek the automatic statutory damages unless you registered in time. (Meaning prior to infringement, unless the infringement soon after publication and you still registered w/in 3 months of publication.) They could still maintain the suit, but they&#039;d be seeking actual damage caused rather than the automatic amounts. In terms of money, this means that their failure to register is very important, but I suspect a lot of potential defendants would still be willing to pay to not get dragged into court publicly, even for small amounts.

The other caveat is that, procedurally speaking, I&#039;m not sure if the lawyers here would be able to re-bring cases against defendants that got the originals dismissed due to a failure to register in time. In terms of the registration rule, yes, you can bring a suit for earlier infringements, but that&#039;s a separate question from whether you can sue the same person again once you&#039;ve fixed the previous registration problem. I don&#039;t happen to know that answer at the moment.

Hope this info&#039;s helpful.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Strikes me as just a bit odd that the original post was talking about precedent from courts&#8212;this judge may have mentioned a prior case, but this rule actually comes straight from the statute rather than caselaw. Section 411 of the Copyright Act: &#8220;&#8230;no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.&#8221;</p>
<p>But to answer @6 and correct what some people here have been assuming, this rule does NOT say that you can&#8217;t sue for infringements from before you registered. It just says that you must go about registering before you actually start the lawsuit. Since these days you automatically do have copyright upon creating a work regardless of whether you&#8217;ve registered it, once you do register you could sue for earlier infringements. In other words, the registration rule isn&#8217;t about whether you own the work, it&#8217;s just a special requirement to sue.</p>
<p>But two important caveats on that. First, you can&#8217;t seek the automatic statutory damages unless you registered in time. (Meaning prior to infringement, unless the infringement soon after publication and you still registered w/in 3 months of publication.) They could still maintain the suit, but they&#8217;d be seeking actual damage caused rather than the automatic amounts. In terms of money, this means that their failure to register is very important, but I suspect a lot of potential defendants would still be willing to pay to not get dragged into court publicly, even for small amounts.</p>
<p>The other caveat is that, procedurally speaking, I&#8217;m not sure if the lawyers here would be able to re-bring cases against defendants that got the originals dismissed due to a failure to register in time. In terms of the registration rule, yes, you can bring a suit for earlier infringements, but that&#8217;s a separate question from whether you can sue the same person again once you&#8217;ve fixed the previous registration problem. I don&#8217;t happen to know that answer at the moment.</p>
<p>Hope this info&#8217;s helpful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lold</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713541</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[lold]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just LOL&#039;d in my pants at this!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just LOL&#8217;d in my pants at this!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713516</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 00:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713516</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hah, Evan Stone should stick to porn. What next, Peter North tries brain surgery?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hah, Evan Stone should stick to porn. What next, Peter North tries brain surgery?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Manis</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713176</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Manis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 13:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hmm..is it illegal to download via Torrent sites..?

http://mani4astro.blogspot.com]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm..is it illegal to download via Torrent sites..?</p>
<p><a href="http://mani4astro.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://mani4astro.blogspot.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heh</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713113</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Heh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:49:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Derptastic Tongue in whose cheek??]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Derptastic Tongue in whose cheek??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yours</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-713043</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Yours]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 10:03:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-713043</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Sam: Civil courts don&#039;t return verdicts.  There is no innocence or guilt, only civil judgements.  There is also no &quot;reasonable doubt&quot;, just a &quot;preponderance of the evidence&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Sam: Civil courts don&#8217;t return verdicts.  There is no innocence or guilt, only civil judgements.  There is also no &#8220;reasonable doubt&#8221;, just a &#8220;preponderance of the evidence&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>/producer-sues-bittorrent-users-but-doesnt-own-copyright-100924/#comment-712969</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 07:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=27342#comment-712969</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;In previous articles we’ve dubbed this creative use of the legal system as a pay-up-or-else  scheme. The number one priority for the people involved is to make money off alleged file-sharers, it’s a new business model that has proven to be very effective.&quot;


Guilty until proven innocent!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In previous articles we’ve dubbed this creative use of the legal system as a pay-up-or-else  scheme. The number one priority for the people involved is to make money off alleged file-sharers, it’s a new business model that has proven to be very effective.&#8221;</p>
<p>Guilty until proven innocent!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
