• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
  • Contact Us
  • Pages
    • About Us
    • Cookie Policy
    • DMCA
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
No Result
View All Result
Law Luxury
No Result
View All Result
Home Copyright Law

The media organisation paid via the EU Parliament to make a video promoting a copyright law it stood to make tens of millions from once sued a photographer for complaining that they’d ripped him off

Dominick Rios by Dominick Rios
March 14, 2019
in Copyright Law
0
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Yesterday, I wrote about how MEP Julia Reda resolved the mystery of ways the European Parliament got here to supply a batshit smear-campaign video selling the new Copyright Directive and smearing the opposition to the Directive (along with signatories to the most important petition in human history): it grew to become out that the video were produced by means of AFP, a large media business enterprise that stands to make hundreds of thousands if the Directive passes. Now that is bad enough, but studying Mike Masnick’s Techdirt insurance of this issue reminded me of some thing else about AFP, the ones campaigners for the strongest feasible copyright regime:

Related Posts

The Canadian government has launched the especially practical results of its big, year-lengthy review of copyright regulation

Writers concerned they might not get paid under new copyright law

Gigi Hadid wants an alternate in copyright regulation for her Instagram account

Houston School District Ordered To Pay $nine.2 Million In Copyright Infringement Case

 

 

lower back in 2010, AFP used a photographer’s pictures of the Haiti quake without permission or compensation, and whilst the photographer complained, AFP sued the photographer, arguing that every one photos posted to Twitter are presumptively lawful to re-use and searching for a judgment maintaining this view. (AFP lost and needed to pay the photog $1.2 million). The factor being that AFP has a highly selective form of copyright fundamentalism: in relation to copyright guidelines that would pad its backside line by using millions, no cost is simply too high. But while it’s far playing rapid-and-free with others’ copyright, it’s going to threaten and try to bankrupt the aggrieved birthday party.

Next Post

Artists Temporarily Drop ‘Fortnite’ Lawsuits After Supreme Court Ruling

No Result
View All Result

Today Trending

Impact and Effects of COVID-19 on Immigration Applicants

January 15, 2021

Why You Should Hire An International Law Firm

October 20, 2020

Benefits of Hiring a Personal Injury Lawyer

December 22, 2020

The Indian Women Who Fought Their Way Into the Legal Profession

March 15, 2019

5 Steps to Prepare for an Indianapolis Attorney Consultation

September 28, 2020

The Importance of an Intellectual Property Lawyer

September 12, 2020

Recent Post

Help Stop Sexual Assault: Know your Rights

February 18, 2021

MOBILE LOST COMPLAINT LETTER TO POLICE

February 16, 2021

Steps to Take After Getting Involved in a Car Accident

January 25, 2021
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Mail us: [email protected]

© 2021 lawluxury - All Rights Reserved to Us!

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
  • Contact Us
  • Pages
    • About Us
    • Cookie Policy
    • DMCA
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

© 2021 lawluxury - All Rights Reserved to Us!