[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Attorney fees
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: Attorney fees |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:39:45 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) |
rjack wrote:
The Court's comprehensive docket records are starting to appear
> as if they have been spammed by a robot server from the the SFLC.
If there are many violators, then there need to be many cases.
It seems to take the filing of a court case to gain the attention
of a violator, and then they generally come into compliance.
(Cue the Verizon/Actiontec response :-)
What is manifestly clear from case law is that once a copyright
owner becomes aware of a violation and takes no action, the court
will assume that the owner is granting permission.
- Attorney fees, rjack, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: Attorney fees, rjack, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees, Hyman Rosen, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees, David Kastrup, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees, Hyman Rosen, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees, David Kastrup, 2008/07/11
- Re: Attorney fees, Hyman Rosen, 2008/07/13
- Re: Attorney fees, David Kastrup, 2008/07/13
- Re: Attorney fees, Hyman Rosen, 2008/07/13
- Re: Attorney fees, David Kastrup, 2008/07/13
- Re: Attorney fees, Hyman Rosen, 2008/07/13