SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Cloudflare doesn’t have to cut off copyright-infringing websites, judge rules:
Cloudflare is not liable for the copyright infringement of websites that use its content-delivery and security services, a federal judge ruled yesterday.
Cloudflare was sued in November 2018 by Mon Cheri Bridals and Maggie Sottero Designs, two wedding dress manufacturers and sellers that alleged Cloudflare was guilty of contributory copyright infringement because it didn't terminate services for websites that infringed on the dressmakers' copyrighted designs. The companies sought a jury trial, but Judge Vince Chhabria yesterday granted Cloudflare's motion for summary judgment in a ruling in US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Chhabria noted that the dressmakers have been harmed "by the proliferation of counterfeit retailers that sell knock-off dresses using the plaintiffs' copyrighted images" and that they have "gone after the infringers in a range of actions, but to no avail—every time a website is successfully shut down, a new one takes its place."
[...] While the ruling resolves the lawsuit's central question in Cloudflare's favor, the judge scheduled a case management conference for October 27 "to discuss what's left of the case."
[...] A defendant is liable for contributory copyright infringement if it has knowledge of another's infringement and materially contributes to or induces that infringement, the judge noted in his ruling against the dressmakers. "Simply providing services to a copyright infringer does not qualify as a 'material contribution,'" he wrote. "Rather, liability in the Internet context follows where a party 'facilitate[s] access' to infringing websites in such a way that 'significantly magnif[ies]' the underlying infringement."
Although a defendant can be found to materially contribute to copyright infringement if it acts as "an essential step in the infringement process," this should not be interpreted too broadly, the judge wrote.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by FatPhil on Tuesday October 12 2021, @06:16PM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 12 2021, @06:22PM (1 child)
Which part of "copyrighted designs" are you unable to understand?
As for those who specifically seek skillfully-crafted anything, by definition they are smart enough to know when counterfeits are of worse quality, and when (as usual) they originate from the same Chinese/Vietnamese/Bangladeshi sweatshop as the "genuine article".
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday October 14 2021, @08:52AM
The phrase was used because it's accurate, and it's not one I objected to, because it's correct.
You appear to be attempting to straw man me, and pretend I've said something I've not.
Please learn how to read, parse, and interpret sentences before trying to engage in an argument, failing to do so will make you look stupid.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves