Hotfile lawyers will have to prepare the defence of the hoster because the MPAA is going to continue the direct download service, even if the loads for infringement are not considered admissible.
Last February, we inform you of the offensive by American movie studios against Hotfile, the hosting of files direct download player. The judge overseeing the case just to allow the studios to continue Hotfile, but not on the ground of infringement, only for the "promotion of illegal downloading" and "generate income indirectly from pirated content". The federal judge in Miami thus allows the MPAA (lobby representing the five studios in question) to pursue his legal action against Hotfile, yet already seen its simple image hosting status confirmed by justice on several occasions, in the same way that MegaUpload or RapidShare.
Rest in the Grokster case, in 2005, the Supreme Court held the managers of the P2P network responsible for the exchange of files on it. This is a case on which the charge can rely to argue his application. Sufficient to recognize Hotfile as guilty, even if the illegality of downloading is judged on the user of the service? It will take the MPAA demonstrated that Hotfile leaves voluntarily move illegal files on its servers to benefit, including a strong hearing that the service converts revenues (subscriptions and advertising).
The lobby highlights for example the fact that Hotfile leaves appear in the list of files most popular those which are the subject of requests on the part of the right holders. Hotfile responds that the system is automated, hence some errors, and ensures that the files removed from its servers after request no longer appear on these lists. On this point as on the merits, it will be for the judge to determine, because this case is part to go to trial...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment