From the article:
The web designer, Trevor Paetkau, took full
responsibility for the issue in a statement to Global News.
“It should
be noted that the fault has nothing to do with Canipre.
Wait a
second.... Doesn't copyright protect both the act of copying and public
"performance" of such images?
So while the web designer, Trevor Paetkau,
has infringed copyright by copying - whether or not Canipre knew of the
infringement doesn't change the fact it was officially Canipre itself who
"publicly displayed" the image.
As a result of that one factor (and there
is at least one other factor) I disagree with Mr. Paetkau that Canipre has no
copyright responsibility in this matter.
Canipre needs to ask
itself:
If they sent a take down notice to an entity, and that entity
claimed innocence, would Canipre accept that claim or would Canipre hold said
entity at least partially responsible due to the public display.
After all,
I seriously doubt Canipre accepts any of those Canadians who they have contacted
about Copyright infringement who have claimed innocence.
Additionally, I
think Canipre needs to ask itself:
If it turned out the entity was a "for
profit" organization - would that alter Canipre's perspective with regards
innocence?
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
