I was apparently wrong recently regarding copyright on Hacker News
In a discussion of police playing copyrighted music to trigger automated takedowns of civillian video, someone pointed out that a recent US Supreme Court decision invalidated copyrightholders' right to sue US states for copyright infringement.
One would presume this might extend to any entity operating as state government.
Say, for the sake of argument, a state university library system.
Which would mean that such a system might take upon itself to, for whatever reason, host Sci-Hub, LibGen, or ZLibrary, in a legally-immune status.
That would be an interesting development.
(There's no specific need for it to be a library system. It could be the forestry department, prisons, or an individual legislator or elected official.)
Also, should anyone care to know why I appreciate being called out when I'm wrong, it's because occasionally I learn things.
And those can be interesting.
Keep in mind that I might well be wrong in my interpretation leading of this thread as well.
Which is why I'm floating the concept --- for discussion and assessmen.
So, I'm getting really interested in precisely what Allen v. Cooper does and does not do.
TL;DR: it's the March 23, 2020 US Supreme Court case asserting sovereign immunity against infringement of copyright or patent claims against state government.
"Get out of jail" (or civil court) cards are rare and interesting. Immunity and impunity often causes all kinds of problems. But the Law is
an ass W a tool, and ... this is an awfully interesting tool.
I'm finding relatively little discussion. My little suggestion above remains the application I'd be interested in.
@pluralistic doesn't seem to have picked this up yet based on online searches.
@dredmorbius That doesn't mean the videos wont be auto striked or have the poster of the video liable (they aren't posted by the police) right?
It's just an interesting aside?
On the internet, everyone knows you're a cat — and that's totally okay.