My name is "Defendant Radzikowski"

Shadowsong666 · Apr 9, 2009

crazy_cat said:
The fact one of them then posted the file on the internet as well is just the icing on the cake in this case and is what made it visible to WOTC - the file was (assuming I'm right) already being pirated by all of these various 'local' users.

But funny to mention that copying a cd, file, game isn't illegal in germany as long as no copy protection prohibits it. I can easily share all my pdf files with my friends and am legal afaik. We have a law that explicitly allows private copies. So if someone does anything illegal with the stuff i gave him he is doing it and needs to be sued and not me. Illegal like sharing it with the world over torrent or anything like that.
So if i game with lets see 8 friends i can give everyone a copy and they can keep it without buying it. The only thing they may not do is share it with others. Show - yes - share - not.

Somehow i think our laws differ much in certain social points.

Caerin · Apr 9, 2009

Primal said:
Hmmm... what if a patron borrowed a book from a public library and scanned it? What if he *stole* it? Would the library be held responsible if there would be several patrons who might have done this, but the exact scanning date (and, therefore, the patron responsible for doing so) could not be determined? Let's assume that the only thing we could say for sure is that this particular pirated copy is/was owned by a public library -- what happens, and who's held responsible for it?

The library is not liable for actions done by library users under US law (which I am the most familiar with). However, this is partly because Libraries and Archives have their own exemption- Title 17: Section 108, Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives. They have to meet certain criteria and take some actions to be protected by that statute.

This person, assuming what he writes is correct, is not in a good situation. If his interpretation of Polish law is accurate, then he could legally share his copy in the manner that he described absent contractual obligations (which would also be covered by Polish law).

However, the actions of the person who further shared the materials on scribd are actionable beyond Poland. It's that person, though, that should be on trial rather than this individual. However, it's his name on the documents, so he'll need to use that in a defense.

Obryn · Apr 9, 2009

Guys, really. Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean. This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.

Poland is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and everything that implies.

The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way it recognises the copyright of its own nationals. For example, French copyright law applies to anything published or performed in France, regardless of where it was originally created.

As most everyone has been saying, your best course of action is to stop digging your hole deeper and just retain an attorney. Do not believe the people who are telling you that copyright law magically disappears when you cross a political border - they really have no idea what they're talking about.

-O

Caerin · Apr 9, 2009

Obryn said:
Guys, really. Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean. This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.

Poland is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and everything that implies.

As most everyone has been saying, your best course of action is to stop digging your hole deeper and just retain an attorney. Do not believe the people who are telling you that copyright law magically disappears when you cross a political border - they really have no idea what they're talking about.

-O

I'm not certain that's what people were saying. The way that Berne, and just about every other copyright treaty works, is that they provide guidelines that need to be enacted domestically. Generally, these guidelines offer guaranteed minimums of protection. Part of the convention is reciprocal- like the example you quoted, any potentially infringing action is under the jurisdiction of the member country. In France, US works are protected just as French works are protected. In Poland, US works are protected just as Polish works are protected. This also applies to legal limitations- for example, libraries can lend British works under the US doctrine of first sale in the US, even though British libraries follow different law in the UK and must take additional steps to lend books.

So, in Poland, *if* his initial action was legal under a Polish private use exemption, then it was legal. The problem then comes with the additional distribution on the Internet. Not only is that very likely illegal under Polish law, it means the action *also* took place in the US jurisdiction, making it actionable in the US. This is a bit of an oversimplification, but it means that the person infringing is also liable in the US as well.

Obryn · Apr 9, 2009

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm happy to confess I'm far from an expert in this sort of thing.

And yes, I'm sure that WotC will need to take some sort of action in Poland as well. As far as I know, though, the U.S. suit is a prerequisite for any other actions.

The wheels of justice might move a bit slower across political boundaries, but they still move.

-O

JPL · Apr 9, 2009

Brown Jenkin said:
What written discovery? The defendant is in Poland. US Courts can't extradite someone for discovery in a civil case. Unless the defendant chooses to fight this in the US Courts the case will be decided in WotC favor for non-appearance. WotC is then obligated to refile in Poland in order to collect its judgment. He may want to contact a lawyer about the possibility of this and what to do, but there will be no discovery unless he chooses to come to the US and fight.

Brown Jenkin, Mr. Radzikowski might talk to that lawyer and he might give the exact same advice. Still seems like a good idea to talk to that lawyer before he posts about this case.

For all I know, his lawyer might agree with every word you say, and even encourage Defendant to go online and tell his story and stoke the fiery flames of nerd rage. In which case, what's the harm in waiting?

darrell I · Apr 9, 2009

Bleoberis De Ganis said:
It is against the law to resell dvds, cds, books, etc.

No, no it isn't, certainly not in the UK at least...

I'll be charitable and say that you may be confusing yourself with the legal text in the front of books which says; "The sale of this book without its cover has not been approved by the publisher." Which is basically there to stop it being resold without the author and publisher's names.

Obryn · Apr 9, 2009

darrell I said:
I'll be charitable and say that you may be confusing yourself with the legal text in the front of books which says; "The sale of this book without its cover has not been approved by the publisher." Which is basically there to stop it being resold without the author and publisher's names.

That's not why that blurb is there.

When a store wishes to let a publisher know that a book or magazine has not been sold, rather than send the whole book back, they just send the front cover. (Shipping back the entire book is economically unfeasible.) The book is reported as unsold & destroyed, and the store receives some reimbursement.

Unethical bookstores might try to sell a book that they have also reported as unsold and destroyed. The blurb lets them (and you) know that this is illegal.

-O

jursamaj · Apr 9, 2009

Obryn said:
That's not why that blurb is there.

When a store wishes to let a publisher know that a book or magazine has not been sold, rather than send the whole book back, they just send the front cover. (Shipping back the entire book is economically unfeasible.) The book is reported as unsold & destroyed, and the store receives some reimbursement.

Unethical bookstores might try to sell a book that they have also reported as unsold and destroyed. The blurb lets them (and you) know that this is illegal.

-O

It took me so long to get registered that you beat me to this answer.

Incidentally, this system is why books cost about twice what they ought to. It's also why print-on-demand boutiques could be competitive.

Mostly it's not the *stores* that try to sell stripped books, but unethical employees and/or trash searchers.

As for the thread, after some 90 posts, aren't people getting tired of saying "shut up and get a lawyer"? If he hasn't yet, one more post saying it isn't going to convince him.

(BTW, he has at least decided to shut up on ENWorld.)

avin · Apr 9, 2009

Obryn said:
As most everyone has been saying, your best course of action is to stop digging your hole deeper and just retain an attorney. Do not believe the people who are telling you that copyright law magically disappears when you cross a political border - they really have no idea what they're talking about.

Well, that wasn't my case I said he's probably in some trouble. But I can say for sure that no international law can prevail over brazilian law, for example, creating some sanction that exists on US but does not exist on Brasil.

My name is "Defendant Radzikowski"

Shadowsong666

First Post

Caerin

First Post

Obryn

Hero

Caerin

First Post

Obryn

Hero

JPL

Adventurer

darrell I

First Post

Obryn

Hero

jursamaj

First Post

avin

First Post

Similar Threads