Greenguy's Board - View Single Post

Bill · 2004-08-12, 10:06 PM

i can't be sure what was in Torn's mind, but I agree copyright infringement is the tool, the legal weapon that makes this case so interesting.

However, this situation has multiple parts. Torn is within his rights to send a copyright warning to the host. We don't have to agree with it, but he has the legal right to do it.

Then, the host owner came here and said "Hey, wasn't us that shut kloot down, we just passed on the message". But because Kloot WAS shut down by someone, it makes a big splash, because it's such a dramatic example of the power of copyright infringement claims as a weapon.

But, it turns out it's Kloots "friend", the freehost owner, who shut him down, not Torn. Torn was as surprised as anybody that the guy was shut down so hard.

So, it's not really Torn who has gutted Kloot, it's Kloots friend, who is also presumably the one who installed the 3 autodownloading "somethings" that tripped Torn's norton.

Does Torn have the absolute legal authority to say "You can't use my content in the skim.". Clearly, YES. Is it a good business decision if you want to be used on TGPs? Probably not but who the fuck knows? TGP owners may think the world revolves around that traffic but it don't mean he couldn't make plenty without TGP traffic.

It was said earlier, this debate wouldn't have lasted a page if it had just been about autodialers, but that is what it's about.

It's an unintended side effect that the copyright threat was enough to scare Kloots cheating "freehost" "friend" into shutting down his crime operation loading toolbars onto the stream of TGP traffic.

2004-08-12, 10:06 PM	#157
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	i can't be sure what was in Torn's mind, but I agree copyright infringement is the tool, the legal weapon that makes this case so interesting. However, this situation has multiple parts. Torn is within his rights to send a copyright warning to the host. We don't have to agree with it, but he has the legal right to do it. Then, the host owner came here and said "Hey, wasn't us that shut kloot down, we just passed on the message". But because Kloot WAS shut down by someone, it makes a big splash, because it's such a dramatic example of the power of copyright infringement claims as a weapon. But, it turns out it's Kloots "friend", the freehost owner, who shut him down, not Torn. Torn was as surprised as anybody that the guy was shut down so hard. So, it's not really Torn who has gutted Kloot, it's Kloots friend, who is also presumably the one who installed the 3 autodownloading "somethings" that tripped Torn's norton. Does Torn have the absolute legal authority to say "You can't use my content in the skim.". Clearly, YES. Is it a good business decision if you want to be used on TGPs? Probably not but who the fuck knows? TGP owners may think the world revolves around that traffic but it don't mean he couldn't make plenty without TGP traffic. It was said earlier, this debate wouldn't have lasted a page if it had just been about autodialers, but that is what it's about. It's an unintended side effect that the copyright threat was enough to scare Kloots cheating "freehost" "friend" into shutting down his crime operation loading toolbars onto the stream of TGP traffic.