Re: Re: Re: Derivative Inquiry

At 3:25 PM -0400 8/29/06, Jason sheperd wrote:
>Thanks for the confirmation - the real advice to the client is of
>course the risk that a publisher like McGraw-Hill will threaten or
>bring a lawsuit even though it doesn't have solid legal grounds
>which means the client will cave because the publish has infinite
>resources compared to client.

I would state it slightly differently. McGraw-Hill may threaten a lawsuit, but is unlikely to file a lawsuit against a daycare center, even if it does have solid legal grounds, unless the client refuses to cave; and even then is going to hesitate because there's a big downside (adverse precedent) and little upside:

"In a case where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200. The court shall remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed and had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of the copyrighted work was a fair use under section 107, if the infringer was: (i) an employee or agent of a nonprofit educational institution...." 504(c)(2)

John Noble Received on Fri Sep 01 2006 - 01:30:01 GMT