So. How do the other copyright nerds on here feel about the leap from "Warner/Chappell has no copyright interest" to "woo public domain!"
@vranieri @dispositive @xor sorry, not following — insofar as anyone who sues is subject to sanctions because they can't be in a better
-
-
@vranieri@dispositive@xor position than Warner/Chappell? -
@sarahjeong@dispositive@xor in that lawyers must do diligence and convince themselves they have sufficient proof before filing -
@sarahjeong@dispositive@xor can't just say "I own!" and expect to survive a challenge (esp. b/c this implicates standing to sue) -
@vranieri@dispositive@xor right, but is this enough to declare something in the public domain? or is it, say, a super-orphan work -
@sarahjeong@vranieri@dispositive it's the Oliver Twist of orphan works -
@xor@sarahjeong@vranieri@dispositive It's not just presuming there's no other Ps. The discussion of digestive publication is the thing. -
@xor@sarahjeong@vranieri@dispositive Note that the court can't reach a determination at SJ there, but there's every indication… -
@xor@sarahjeong@vranieri@dispositive that Plaintiffs would prevail before a fact-finder. Hard to argue Summy lacked permission. - 3 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.