> -----Original Message----- > From: fedora-marketing-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:fedora-marketing-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf > Of Karsten Wade > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 12:05 PM > To: fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: the gray line > > Please allow me to pull this discussion into a separate > thread, as I'm losing the details in the "Fedora Guide" thread. > > Trying to understand what the current position is on linking > to third- party sites that -may- link to other sites that may > have infringing content. In other words, fedorafaq.org, > fedoraforum.org, etc. > > My current understanding is: > > * We -can- send people to those sites, as general answer sites > * We -cannot- send people to those sites to "get your MP3s" > * This is because we are not able to control the content of > any website, from google.com to fedorafaq.org. This is > different from knowing that the target URL has specific > packages that circumvent stuff. > > Is that clear as mud? > > thx - Karsten >From what I have read, the issue is one of inducement of infringement, brought to the fore by the US Supreme Court's decision in June against Grokster. The classic in this area of IP law was the "Betamax" decision which came down on Sony's side. In that case, the Court allowed Betamax video recorders to be sold because Sony made the case for a video recorder to be a "time-shifting" device. Recording a TV show so you can watch it later was not considered to be an infringing use. Sony did not go out of its way to show users how to steal movies using Beta video tapes. They didn't offer a service that made illegal movies available to users. They only made a machine that could record video. Sony wasn't at fault for infringement simply because a user could use a VCR to steal movies. In the Grokster case, the key difference is that Grokster appeared to encourage its users to use their software to obtain illegal copies of music files. They did not charge any fees, and only earned revenue from ads visible to users. So the case was made that Grokster depended on illegal file sharing for its business model. The more illegal activity, the more people used Grokster (giving it advertising revenue). So this new decision says that you can be liable for infringement if you encourage others to infringe. According to the Grokster decision, that company went too far. But there's no definition of exactly how much encouragement is too much. So companies that make technology are properly cautious right now. Karsten, are their attorneys at Red Hat who can offer guidelines about what the Fedora Project can do, how much can be done to encourage users, and how it should be explained? It's really a legal topic. Erik -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
