Marlith wrote:faro wrote:Reported to eBay, their ISP and PayPal...Feeling like a slouch.....all I did was report it to eBay
faro wrote:Reported to eBay, their ISP and PayPal...
=> eBay: RedirectUser ID hu11114 still has links to their own website SELLING copyright-violating items ( 404 Not Found - iiNet Australia ).Link is present on almost every one of their current auctions; eBay listings .Thank you for cancelling their previous auction 8830155701 - now relisted on 8830654450 without the offending link.Regards,David. (harami2000)
DungeonDelver wrote:I leave this one to you guys, who are the experts at getting these guys shut down:"Classic module"This "Classic module"...is a friggin' photocopy of Q1. Even shows a picture of it!
deimos3428 wrote:I understand the staunch "no tolerance" attitude that many adopt, but to me, this one isn't as bad. What do I mean?Probably, this was photocopied years ago, possibly for personal use, possibly not. It definitely wasn't specifically photocopied/PDFed for sale and profit. It really does seem like a genuine "throw in" that the seller probably should have just trashed/kept to themselves. Go after him if you want, but try to be polite.
jasonw1239 wrote:This looks like a copyright infringement...
MShipley88 wrote:Just thinking...if I own a copy of the work in question, is buying an unauthorized electronic copy still a violation of copyright law?
Mars wrote:I was just looking at the copyright code and will point out this:§ 506. Criminal offenses5 (a) Criminal Infringement. - Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either -(1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or(2) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000**********Suppose you made yourself a copy of ST1 for your own safe keeping. This would then be a crimial offence. By (2) you have made a reproduction of something which has a retail value of $1,000. I guess they would have to argue that the copy was actually worth that much though - maybe.
US Code wrote:shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, United States Code. For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement.
MShipley88 wrote:For instance, here is the equivalent code in the Canadian law books:"Aye...ya cannah' make yer copies o' stuff fer nuthin', aye? Avec parlez le codes du legal non copy par fu les carbonage, no?"