Comments on: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) http://www.anti-abuse.org/online-copyright-infringement-liability-limitation-act-ocilla/ Network security consulting & resources on Internet abuse and the related legal matters Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:00:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Rodolfo http://www.anti-abuse.org/online-copyright-infringement-liability-limitation-act-ocilla/comment-page-1/#comment-4075 Rodolfo Tue, 27 Dec 2011 14:32:57 +0000 http://xenedra.com/aa/?p=24#comment-4075 i hired someone to create a website and years later i received an email that i had copy righted pictures in it that i had not paid for. As soon as i was informed i took down the website and replaced the images. under the safe harbor law i'm i still responsible? i hired someone to create a website and years later i received an email that i had copy righted pictures in it that i had not paid for. As soon as i was informed i took down the website and replaced the images. under the safe harbor law i’m i still responsible?

]]> By: Brian http://www.anti-abuse.org/online-copyright-infringement-liability-limitation-act-ocilla/comment-page-1/#comment-1725 Brian Tue, 29 Mar 2011 01:17:16 +0000 http://xenedra.com/aa/?p=24#comment-1725 As I understand the law: • Section 512 of OCILLA is a takedown provision for OSPs including ISPs. • When neither designation applies to a corporation which, without the permission of, and unbeknown to, the copyright holder, sells an infringing image on its site for its own profit and that of an affiliate company contracted by the corporation, presumably the corporation is liable. • And, presumably, the Oops defense is no defense (reference Federal statement of liability by Eric Holder, citing BP's "failure"), especially when the copyright holder's name is clearly displayed on an image. Please confirm that OCILLA has no bearing on such an infringement. Thanks. As I understand the law:

• Section 512 of OCILLA is a takedown provision for OSPs including ISPs.

• When neither designation applies to a corporation which, without the permission of, and unbeknown to, the copyright holder, sells an infringing image on its site for its own profit and that of an affiliate company contracted by the corporation, presumably the corporation is liable.

• And, presumably, the Oops defense is no defense (reference Federal statement of liability by Eric Holder, citing BP’s “failure”), especially when the copyright holder’s name is clearly displayed on an image.

Please confirm that OCILLA has no bearing on such an infringement.

Thanks.

]]>