Quote:
Originally Posted by sabianq
it was already argued before a judge
she told me about the case law and i mirrored them.
google vs perfect 10
answer my question please
|
So, did you read the original decision in Google v. Perfect 10? It's a fair-use defense, full of subtle arguments about the precise nature of the facets of the infringement, a careful balancing of the facts. The 9th Circuit overturned it, deciding on fine balance in the other direction.
It's not as black and white as you seem to think.
Grayness is bad. Grayness can lead to dollars leaving Phil and Fraser and going to Phil and Fraser's lawyer.
For one instance of a potential to go wrong, there is this:
Wikipedia: Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Quote:
|
The court held that Google's use of framing and hyperlinking (deep linking) was a fair use of P10's images, because the use was highly transformative.
|
One item in Google's fair-use defense was that the images were only thumbnails. Your use of the Smithsonian image, which would become BAUT Forum's use if the owners didn't act to discourage it, was a whole image, not transformed.
The point of an intellectual property policy like BAUT's is not to win in court. It is to avoid being in court. It's good business to be conservative in using other's property. I think BAUT's owners are happy with the policy where it is.
You and your IP neighbor may wish to argue the fine points of this complex issue, in your own case, on your dime. Please don't invite BAUT's owners to join you.
And, please, stop lawyering your case here. It could be another
Do you think 0.9999999~ =1 , that is infinite 9s. If you want the policy changed, I suggest you get your lawyer to talk to their lawyer and hash it all out.