?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I am addressing this very seriously to EVERY lawyer with legal expertise in copyright infringement and fair use, and I'm also addressing this to any lawyer well-versed in the legal statutes on internet child pornography.

As I'm sure many of you already know, pornish_pixies was permanently deleted today by Livejournal.com, along with a number of other communities with "incest" as an interest, an incomplete list of which is here.


Straight up, people. What are our options as a fandom to fight this? What are all our options to fight this, and how can we as a fandom collectively work to deal with Six Apart in this issue?

Please respond, because I really, really want to get started on the part where the fandom rallies together to make our voices heard by Six Apart.

Thanks.

Comments

jehanne1431
May. 30th, 2007 12:15 pm (UTC)
>>>They're not so much afraid of losing a court case as being involved in one at all...

With the cost of legal fees being what it is, I don't blame them. This is a big, huge, gray-area can of worms to be dragging into open court.
nebris
May. 30th, 2007 01:20 pm (UTC)
the cost of legal fees...
...will pale next to the money they're going to lose when possibly thousands of folks who were going to drop $150 on a permanent account next month say 'forget it!'. Two in this household right here.

~M~
heidi8
May. 30th, 2007 03:48 pm (UTC)
A few weeks ago, I posted about Digg.com taking a stand by saying that hosting DIGGs of the code to crack a DVD encryption wasn't a violation of US copyright laws and if it was, they were willing to defend their hosting of the links in court.

Why is DIGG so willing to take that sort of risk in a situation where the liability could be considerable, but SixApart is so wimpy that they can't even investigate the content of the communities and journals in question?
hikari_cyhan
May. 30th, 2007 10:42 pm (UTC)
For the same reason Google was willing to help censor internet in China.
(Anonymous)
May. 31st, 2007 07:33 pm (UTC)
Digg wasn't willing to take that sort of risk, it was forced on them. They tried to suprress that number but were so overwhelmed by submissions they gave in.

If digg was really willing to take that risk they wouldn't have pulled the posts in the first place.
This Community should be used for informative and educational purposes only or to give the public a general understanding of the law.
Nothing in this community, its posts or the comments thereto should be considered as specific advice. Your access to and use of this Community means that you understand and acknowledge that no attorney-client relationship exists between you and any poster or commenter hereto, and that the Community should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney/counselor/solicitor in your jurisdiction.

Profile

fandom_lawyers
Fandom Lawyers

Page Summary

Latest Month

April 2015
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Jared MacPherson