On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 01:34:41AM -0700, Greg Newby wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:32:06PM -0400, dlainson@sympatico.ca wrote:
Hello
Here's a letter (which I'm apparently breaking some US law by forwarding, but I'll take the risk) which I find disturbing. Seems that "Project Gutenberg established PGA to permit the illegal downloading of works". Of this I wasn't aware. As a big contributor to PGA it concerns me personally, as well as setting a very dangerous precedent.
Folks, it's safe to assume that the people who sent the letter (or other folks who might send other letters) could access the gutvol-d list or archives. So, in the interest of not helping them to think of new ways to harass us, I won't send a lot of detail on this particular case, or the ones like it.
Saw this story on slashdot, as well as Michael's Part I of today's newsletter. So much for keeping this under our hats :-) One quick factoid: None of PG (of US) has received any contact from the Mitchell lawyers (not to Michael's house, despite the statements in the letter, not to our business office in Utah, nor to my house in Fairbanks, which is the corporate business address of record). So, it's a little premature to make any sort of response. In case you were wondering, one of the first things we do when we get such letters is confirm that the people involved are who they say they are, and have some sort of legal relationship to the texts. In this case, we only have one forwarded email, which could be fake or from parties without legal standing. Thus, it's premature to even feel confident that the letter/complaint is real, or that (if it is real) the people who sent it are legitimate. -- Greg PS: I probably won't have time to post to /. today [my day job is calling], but people can feel free to repost my comments or extracts. There aren't any secrets here, but I do urge a modicum of discretion since so few facts are known.
Suffice to say that, as others have commented, these folks are incorrect in many things. The PG response to such threats is to tell them this (politely), and mention that we have done extensive legal research over the years (in consultation with numerous lawyers) to support our notions. If *they* know of laws or legal precedents to the contrary, we would be very happy to hear of them and will seek to comply, as we do with all other laws.
We also offer to help them, by providing information about these laws in the copies of the eBook(s) in question that we distribute, and to help further by writing letters to infringers they can identify. In short, we point out the errors in their requests, assumptions, claims, etc. and put the ball back in their court.
This has been an effective strategy over the years. But of course, it's effective mostly because we're right, and legal -- PG's diligence in copyright procedures gives us a strong moral & practical ground to stand on.
Does one country have the right to dictate to another what a website can contain when it falls within the law of the host country, and can they force some sort of restrictions on the downloading of material?
The short answer is, no. We are not aware of anything like this, and have looked extensively, and consulted with many legal experts. There are definitely some vague points and unknowns, and eventually there might be treaties etc. that address some of these issues. -- Greg
Dr. Gregory B. Newby Chief Executive and Director Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation http://gutenberg.net A 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization with EIN 64-6221541 gbnewby@pglaf.org