My name is "Defendant Radzikowski"

[pedr]

There can be no extradition in a civil case. This is an entirely private matter between WotC and the defendants - the states concerned have no interest except as arbiters of the law and (where possible) enforcers of the judgment, which could only be an award of a sum of money in damages and/or an injunction prohibiting further violation. There is no requirement to show up for a trial, as far as I know - though failure to do so probably means you don't get to defend against the suit.

I know nothing about cross-jurisdictional civil claims - but it seems as if WotC have not yet made all of the defendants formally aware of the suits. I don't know at which point this could be a problem: the defendants have a right to know they are being sued, and to enter a defence.

How this could potentially interact with differences between Washington/US law and Polish law isn't clear to me - but I'd be very surprised if there was an automatic method of enforcing civil judgments made by US courts in Poland. It may be that, so long as the foreign defendants have no assets in the USA, they are effectively judgment-proof.

 

[S'mon]

Good luck Mr Radzikowski.

I teach copyright in the UK. My general advice to you would be to seek some pro bono advice on your situation, perhaps from a student University law centre in Poland. You need to find out what the situation is in Polish law. You are not likely to get useful advice from American commenters here (including US lawyers) because US law is very different and generally a lot harsher when it comes to (a) treatment of copyright infringement and (b) treatment of individual citizens vs corporations.

 

[Cadfan]

Stop talking!

Get a lawyer!

Argh. I kind of want to discuss what you wrote, but if doing so induces you to keep talking, then its like selling you cyanide tablets and I don't want that on my conscience.

 

[Arivendel]

Ah WotC suing again, brings me back to the time a couple of years back against Daron Rutter also known as Rancored Elf who got sued due to MtG info he got hold of.

If memory serves WotC moves for immediate motion on cases like this so the faster you get a lawyer and respond to things the better, ask for a deal most likely if you give up your group WotC will not continue to press charges on you.

But hey this being the internet means you are just as likely to be Radzikowski as i am of being Osmena (and i live in the Philippines...not saying im Osmena just that its just as plausible for me to claim being so )

 

[Primal]

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?

 

[DaveMage]

Whatever you do, consult a lawyer. Legal advice may not be cheap, but it's a lot cheaper than the possible consequences.

This sounds like a job for Mistwell!!!!

 

[Piratecat]

Assuming OP is the sued guy and not just somebody messing around... it's Internet, you know...

No, he's posting from Warsaw. I'm pretty sure this is legit.

I'll echo the others. Don't talk about this on the internet and get a lawyer; if you can't afford one, look into whether there are any pro bono (free) public lawyers in Warsaw you can talk to. This is not a minor annoyance, and you won't be able to ignore it and hope it goes away. You need to know what your rights are.

 

[pedr]

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?

Well, it's perhaps foolish to speculate on how the law works in this thread but ...

The OP's comparison with lending a physical item is inappropriate, at least under the bits of UK and US copyright law I know. In your example, the library's actions are entirely legal and appropriate - as would an individual lending a physical book to another person.

However copyright is exactly that: the right to make a copy. It is very hard to consider a way in which someone can 'lend' a pdf to someone else without making a copy of it, at the very least onto temporary media. That act of making a copy is (at least arguably) going beyond the rights to the intellectual property given when the pdf was purchased. So both the person 'lending' and the person 'borrowing' are (technically) in breach of the copyright of the rights-owner.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

For everyone who says don't talk, please remember that there is no gag order and that publicly talking is allowed. There have been plenty of cases where trial in the court of public opinion has been more powerful than trial by the courts. The RIAA has problems in part because the grandmas and 12 year olds have come out and spoken publicly. The RIAA has droped several suits because the publicity of sueing an 80 year old grandmother is not worth it.

 

[Imperialus]

I guess if there is a lesson from this it is "Make sure you know who you 'loan' your PDF's to so you can punch them in the nose when they upload it onto the internet and land you in a legal mess."

S'mon makes a good point too. I'm sure if you printed out a copy of the legal stuff and took it down to the University of Warsaw's law school they'd be happy to offer better advice to you than a bunch of random doods on the internet. See if you can get a professor interested in the case. After all these copyright law cases since the RIAA debacle have gotten a lot of attention.