Comments on: Slowing down the copyright trolls

By: Max Kennerly

Max Kennerly — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:38:12 +0000

Indeed, I think these types of copyright claims are more appropriate for agency investigation or arbitration than employment discrimination or personal injury suits. The latter two are typically dependent upon oral testimony (and thus the credibility of the witnesses, which needs to be assessed through live testimony), while the former could reasonably be evaluated solely on the documents.

Just taking that ASSE case I referenced as an example, all the agency would really need, other than the complaint filed, is an answer from the defendant admitting or denying the material facts about the extent and nature of republication.

And that would be it; the investigator or arbitrator could then look at those documents, the core of which would be fewer than 20 pages, and start discussing with the parties a reasonable settlement. That would obviate the need to bring on attorneys for hundreds of dollars an hour, and would keep these small potatoes matters from clogging our federal courts.

By: Litigation and Trial - Max Kennerly

Litigation and Trial - Max Kennerly — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:32:16 +0000

Why Can’t Copyright Trolls Be Compelled Into Agency Hearings Or Arbitration?…

[Update: I somehow missed Ron Coleman’s earlier take on the article, but it’s required reading if you’re interested in the subject. Coleman and Walter Olson both seem on board with, as Olson words it, "steering rights owners into agency complai…

By: Ron Coleman

Ron Coleman — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:01:01 +0000

A very good piece. While the genesis of the system was born of good intentions, and worked pretty well for a very long time, given the way the world works now it is fair to say the whole copyright enforcement system is hopelessly skewed, in a lot of ways. I wrote about one of them — the now inequitable workings of copyright fee shifting — here.