this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
162 points (92.6% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54577 readers
210 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Title is somewhat misleading. It's not for anything video-related. It's for using a (probably free) photo of actress Cuca Escribano without permission.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It’s also odd that they wouldn’t start with a simple takedown notice or Cease & Desist notice. Courts don’t tend to look kindly upon frivolous lawsuits when it’s clear that the filing party didn’t try to resolve things out of court first. Because it ties up the system when courts could be focused on bigger or more complicated issues. Judges don’t appreciate feeling like their time is being wasted.

[–] HughJanus@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well it sounds like they took it down immediately so it was "resolved" but I guess that doesn't undo the lost revenue.

[–] LufyCZ@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

From what I know, if they complied immediately, the plaintiff doesn't really have a case