But I think the law is pretty clear, and a precedent calling their use case fair use would be mind blowing. You need new, much more common sense IP legislation that redefines consumer rights in a digital world.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I kind of suspect this was an attempt on the IA's end to get parts of copyright struck down by court ruling. Laws can be clear and still found to not be in the public's interest, or in violation of some other legal doctrine, and sometimes you'll see groups come at them sideways.

Ownership laws are really tough ones to chip away at, and IP law in particular has been getting worse and more unassailable over time.

[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago

Probably, but I think that every month that CDL went unchallenged was slowly building a precedent. I wonder if they had stuck to CDL if we'd still be waiting for the publishers to blink.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

The constitution explicitly grants authority to regulate IP. There's absolutely no path to a constitutional issue, and constitutional issues are the only way you get laws overturned. "Other legal doctrine" means something like violations of due process somewhere in the chain, which is a constitutional issue, or direct conflict with another law.

The only possible judicial remedy is the premise that it's fair use, which there's a lot of precedent that it isn't.

load more comments (13 replies)