Dear David, on a first glance, this case looks very much similar to the (in)famous Scientology v xs4all case in the Netherlands.
I'm a bit afraid of giving an advice without more thought on the matter - including understanding what would be the applicable law here - but I suggest checking whether provisions on "fair use", "fair dealing", "exceptions/limitations" and/or "free usages" (depending, again, on what is the applicable law) would not be a valid defense here. In particular, infringement of exclusive rights granted by copyright/droit d'auteur law for the purposes of criticism/discussion is in principle admissible in various jurisdictions. Whether it is also admissible also in practice depends on a range of conditions, again depending on the particular law to be applied. Only judicial power can decide that. I would suggest to check whether such exceptions might possibly apply before taking any other decision. P.S.: nothing in the above excludes liability under other laws (e.g. libel). Ciao, Andrea On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 12:40:14PM +0100, David Berry wrote: > le-Mail-131-502319037 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset=US-ASCII; > delsp=yes; > format=flowed > > > Can anybody offer advice? > > Begin forwarded message: > > >From: Matthew Z > >Date: 8 April 2007 20:06:38 BDT > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: [Libre-Discuss] Science of Identity cult agents attempt > >take-down of chriskcon.com based in spurious copyright law evocations > > > >http://www.mjzhosting.name/collaboration/view_topic.php?id=167 > > > >This might interest some people on the copyleft front. Being > >personally involved in the matter, what I'm most interested in is > >the weight of a certain claim in Jeannie Bishop's letter to myself: > >"The information stated above is accurate, and under penalty of > >perjury, I am authorized to act on behalf of the Science of > >Identity Foundation, the exclusive owner of the copyright that is > >being infringed." > > > >If anyone with some insight into the actual legal mechanisms that > >might arise here has any thoughts on the matter, I would be very > >interested in hearing them. To what degree could the "penalty of > >perjury" come into play? What are worst-case-scenario > >ramifications? etc. Are they just talking shit? Should it be easy > >to keep this website online? > > > >Matt > >_______________________________________________ > >Discuss mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://libresociety.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_libresociety.org > > ---- > > David M. Berry > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > EDB128 > Media and Film De > == > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > _________________________________ -- Andrea Glorioso Assistant Researcher, Politecnico di Torino Dipartimento di Automatica e Informatica, Internet Media Group Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino (TO) - Italy T: +39-011-564-7036 M: +39-348-921-4379 F: +39-011-564-7099 _______________________________________________ fc-uk-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/fc-uk-discuss