|
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Wednesday, January 16 2013 @ 06:22 PM EST |
Where did you read that? I haven't seen it but I admit I'm not familiar with the
case.
It's not in the above filing by his lawyer. That filing recounts the actions
taken by JSTOR and MIT beginning in September and working together for some
months to discover who was doing the "excessive downloading".
The Filing describes MITs open access policy to its network and that MIT makes
JSTOR available without an additional login or ID, it does not say whether JSTOR
had some sort of EULA notice or not.
Apparently JSTOR did have some sort of policy or they would not have been
monitoring excessive download activity or looking for the person doing it.
Whether they had an valid or adequate EULA is of course a question of fact for a
trial.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|