[conspire] I get mail
dan.bikle at gmail.com
Sun Apr 15 22:53:28 PDT 2012
Rick I had no idea you had this collection of sigs.
I like this 1:
The opinions expressed herein are those of absolutely everyone at National
Instruments: the management, staff, stockholders, their spouses, children,
dogs, and cats. In fact, everyone in Austin also agrees. No, make that Texas.
On 4/15/12, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Cranky complaint sent to me in my capacity as owner/operator of
> my Web site. This is actually the first such complaint I've gotten in
> maybe a decade-plus, and definitely the first under DMCA rules.
> I'm serious that I _do_ take copyright concerns to heart.
> FYI, 17 U.S.C. section 512(c)(3)(B) permits me to ignore takedown
> requests that don't at least comply with clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv),
> which this one appears not to because it appears to fail on clause (iv)
> -- but I'm trying to be nice. If a request satisfies clauses (ii),
> (iii), and (iv) but is defective on some of the other three, the service
> provider (i.e., me) is covered by DMCA safe harbour only if he/she
> replies to the complaining party and 'assists' in giving that person the
> chance to send a compliant takedown request.
> ----- Forwarded message from [snip correspondent contact data] -----
> Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 23:21:02 -0400
> From: [snip correspondent contact data]
> To: bofh at linuxmafia.com
> Subject: please remove http://linuxmafia.com/pub/humour/sigs
> You may not copy my file and claim copyright on it.
> Please take this page down immediately.
> Thank you for your attention to this matter.
> (Legally: [snip correspondent's name and prior e-mail address])
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> ----- Forwarded message from Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> -----
> Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 21:53:04 -0700
> From: Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>
> To: [snip correspondent contact data]
> Subject: Re: please remove http://linuxmafia.com/pub/humour/sigs
> Organization: If you lived here, you'd be $HOME already.
> Dear [name redacted]:
> FYI, I nowhere assert copyright on that file or any of its contents.
> You might be thinking of the front-page compilation copyright statement,
> but that statement specifically disclaims any intent to assert copyright
> over works with their own separate ownership and copyright.
> linuxmafia.com complies with all removal requests for materials
> that are credibly claimed via proper 17 U.S.C. section 512(c)(3)
> notification to infringe valid copyright claims or to be the subect of
> infringing activity. Your request lacks three of the six required
> elements for a 512(c)(3) request:
> 512(c)(3)(iv) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service
> provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone
> number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the
> complaining party may be contacted.
> 512(c)(3)(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith
> belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not
> authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
> 512(c)(3)(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is
> accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is
> authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is
> allegedly infringed.
> Additionally, I cannot help noticing (a) you appear to be not the actual
> creator of _any_ of the .signatures in the collection, which means you
> have no copyright ownership, and (b) all of the .signatures are ones
> that are widely and publicly posted to the Internet by their creators
> and others, which would make prohibiting reuse difficult even for
> them, and you are not one of them.
> Best Regads,
> Rick Moen
> rick at linuxmafia.com
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
Some traders make their own luck.
We use a robot.
More information about the conspire