Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scorpioncbr]

Again though, reading the proposed bill on the website it seems the want to go after the host, not the viewer, or am I wrong? they dont seem to make quite a distinction and they keep referring to the owner of the Hosting site.

Also as I asked before what if someone was to host said videos on a server in a country where it is tollerated?

Another user said that what would happen would be that the infringer would be extradited back to the US but what if said country has no extradition treaties, like Russia, China, Sao Tome e Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Somalia etc? I know some of these countries are fairly dangerous and I dont think any American would attempt to set up headquarters there for their hosting site with the sole purpose of uploading movies without fear of prosecution, but just as a technical study of the law.

If an America citizen, moves to China , uploads thousands of films online, (even making a profit), would the MPAA, NATO, ecc be able to do anything?

What about if said American citizen just purchases a server in China, and Uploads said movies from China (i dont know while on holiday or something), and then moves back to the US where he lives? Technically speaking he did not commit any fellony in the US, the server is in China as were the uploads. If he wasn't prosecuted in China, would the US be able to prosecute subject X or not?
Let's also keep in mind that copyright infringment laws in China are uncertain at best..

I do realize these are very 'what if' scenarios and very unlikely situations, but given how the law works I also like to consider very weird cases, especially since I am specializing in international law, unfortunately though I don't have much practical experience so my knowledge is limited to the theoretical aspects but not what would actually happen.

Thank you all for your answers

[Zonath]

If an internet user is infringing from a country where uploading streaming videos is not a crime and which has no extradition treaty with the US, then there isn't a whole lot that the US could do against the infringer directly.  What the US might do is to either put pressure on the country diplomatically to curtail the infringement, or else issue a Special 301 report on the country and possibly initiate dispute settlement with the WTO concerning the country's non-fulfillment of its TRIPS obligations.  The owners of the copyright could also use whatever legal measures exist in-country to sue the infringer, as well.

If the infringer uploaded a bunch of stuff in China and then moved back to the US, he could still be prosecuted in the US, since he's still engaged in the distribution of infringing content, and distribution is one of the rights protected by copyright, so he would have committed felonies while in the US.

[scorpioncbr]

"What the US might do is to either put pressure on the country diplomatically to curtail the infringement"

But do you really think that the US government would really go to such an extent just to enforce a simple copyright vilation? I mean they don't do such things when war or genocide is envolved in certain African states, why would they for copyright violations.

"or else issue a Special 301 report on the country and possibly initiate dispute settlement with the WTO concerning the country's non-fulfillment of its TRIPS obligations."

Again, with all the bigger problems that are going on in the world would the WTO even consider such a request, or would they simply put it a the bottom of a very long "to do list"?

"The owners of the copyright could also use whatever legal measures exist in-country to sue the infringer, as well."

If the country in question has no extradition treaties with the US I would assume that they would also try to impeade any kind of favour toward them wouldn't they? I mean a lot of the countries that dont allow extradition are not in very amicable terms with the US (then again it would make any kind of business opportunity between a US citizen and such country unlikely).

If the infringer uploaded a bunch of stuff in China and then moved back to the US, he could still be prosecuted in the US, since he's still engaged in the distribution of infringing content, and distribution is one of the rights protected by copyright, so he would have committed felonies while in the US.

I'm sorry but I dont follow your logic. If the crime/fellony was commited outside of US soil, (uploading of files) and the files are available on  a server not located on US soil, how is he distributing it from the US? As long as he doesnt access his server account while on US soil, nor uploads anything while in the US technically he wouldnt have committed a foul.

I mean the transmittions and therefore the distribution is still originating from another country isn't it? So if the Chinese government doesn't prosecute (let's hypothesize that copyright violation is legal in China) how could the US government prosecute the individual when technically a crime has not been committed?

[Zonath]

The US Trade Representative is tasked with issuing yearly reports which identify countries that do not offer adequate IP protections, so yes.  The US government has an agency which is specifically tasked with this sort of issue.  If a country isn't doing enough to protect IP rights, it makes the watch list.

Part of the function of the WTO is to settle trade disputes and to oversee countries' compliance with agreements like TRIPS.  Its jurisdiction doesn't generally extend to 'all the bigger problems in the world', so the WTO does have time to mediate and adjudicate trade disputes.  Generally speaking, that's much of the reason the WTO exists in the first place.

And just because a country doesn't have extradition with the US doesn't mean that it's immediately hostile to any business that might want to sue to enforce its IP rights.  Sure, China has been pretty lax in doing anything about copyright infringement, but they're generally trying to do better.

US citizens can be held responsible for crimes committed away from US soil.  Under certain circumstances, so can alien residents of the US and foreigners (ever hear of Manuel Noriega?)  And the infringement is ongoing -- the uploading is only one part of it.  Assuming the servers are still under the control of the uploader in any way, he's still liable for distributing, and that's an ongoing crime or tort.  And even if he's not in control, he's still violated a US law, and that violation has a real impact upon US companies and possibly targets US jurisdiction (assuming people in the US have access to download the infringing material), so the infringer could be prosecuted.  The assumption that a crime hasn't been committed is erroneous.

[scorpioncbr]

Thank you for clearing that up for me, I did not know many of the things you said and didnt think they were possible, this was very helpful.