Actually, it is a battle between the Hollywood and Silicon Valley industries.
Hans On 19 Jan 2012, at 00:11, John Meacham wrote: > And such a thing can take months or years for the courts to figure > out, and unless your free site has a lawyer to fight for your side, > under SOPA/PIPA you can be down the entire time with little recourse. > For anyone hosting content lke hackage, github, etc. when you have > thousands of packages, someone somewhere is going to be upset by > something and will be able to take the site down. _regardless of the > merit of their case_ the site will go down as they figure it out. Not > only that, they would be able to take the site down if it contains a > link to an objectionable site. for instance, if one of the homepage > fields in some cabal file somewhere pointed to a site that someone > took offense too on it. we would not only be obligated to patrol the > code uploaded, but the targets of any urls within said > code/description... and retroactively remove stuff if said links > change to contain objectional material. (for a very vauge definition > of objectionable). it is a really messed up law. > > John > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Hans Aberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: >> On 18 Jan 2012, at 23:11, Brandon Allbery wrote: >> >>>> There is the Beastie Boys case, where the judge decided copyright protects >>>> what is creatively unique. >>> >>> But such judgments are rare, sadly. And for every Beastie Boys case >>> there's at least one The Verve case. >> >> I did not know that. But it was a UK case, wasn't it? - UK copyright laws >> are a lot more tight. >> >> Hans >> >> _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe