Judge Rules Shared Files Folder Not Enough

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In UMG v. Lindor, Judge David G. Trager rejected Ms. Lindor's objection to a Magistrate's Report, in which Ms. Lindor complained that the Report could be read to imply that 'the mere presence of a shared files folder on an individual's computer would ... satisfy the requirements of 17 USC 106(3)', saying that the Report of Magistrate Robert M. Levy could not be so read, since '[t]he report and recommendation does not comment on whether or not the mere presence of a shared files folder satisfies 17 USC 106(3). Instead, it makes clear that plaintiffs will have the burden of proving actual sharing. [Report and Recommendation, at 5] ('At trial, plaintiffs will have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant did indeed infringe plaintiff's copyrights by convincing the fact-finder, based on the evidence plaintiffs have gathered, that defendant actually shared sound files belonging to plaintiffs.') (emphasis added)'"

Comments

Link whoring

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it just me or do most of the stories that get posted by Zonk involve a /. user who is link whoring their companies and/or blogs?

Who cares, all musicians are cocaine/heroin adicts

[cheekyboy]

I mean seriously, who cares if people copy music, the drug addict looser musos will always make music.

Are the artists totally in bed with columbian drug lords? or is it because they generate such massive
amounts of legal money making ventures its ok?

Get a clue judges, the people Pro (C) are the same people that are Pro Drugs and Cocaine!