I thought that this was an interesting quote from Bob Pullen at Plus net
Quote:
|
Our legal bods have already been looking into which of the arguments used against Media CAT, also apply to Digiprotect. Particularly the licensing element. The potential for the subscriber data we've given them to be used in other speculative invoicing scams is obviously a concern. We'll do what we reasonably can to avoid this ever coming to fruition. If that involves having to go through the courts then I'm sure that's what we'll do.
|
I find it staggering that the licences used to perpetuate this scam may not have even been valid for the UK. According to a user named Mullard on Slyck who seems quite knowledgable the licences appear to be a sham and not to afford the right to sue as a licensor of the works in question under the CDPA because the licences do not allow the licensor to deal in the work at all.
If this is true I wonder how the government is going to stop this type of abuse once the DEA comes into force. Or would it be down to everyone to become copywrong sorry copyright specialists