|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
From: Jason Coombs (jasonc_at_science.org)
Date: Wed Jul 10 2002 - 20:10:16 CDT
You need to read the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
Cox has no choice but to comply with the MPAA/copyright.org
demand for decisive action to stop the distribution of the
allegedly-pirated intellectual property. There's no way that
Cox can be said to have violated privacy in this situation
unless they gave out the identity of the accused without a
court order compelling the release of that information.
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/hr2281.pdf
Also look here:
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/onlinesp/
-----Original Message-----
From: SlyFly007
aol.com [mailto:SlyFly007
aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 11:51 AM
To: ktyler
unicornfinancial.com; vuln-dev
securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: [7.8.2002 44916] Notice of Copyright Infringement]
That is completely lame. I understand that Cox has the right to monitor,
yet...I hope Cox realizes that people use high speed internet for a variety
of large downloads. If an action like this is continued by Cox and the
relation with the DMCA, looks like they are going to have a lot of angry
customers for an invasion of privacy.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]