Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Coinchemistry 2012, post: 2604536, member: 28107&quot;]Again you are frothing from the mouth and making broad pronouncements without having a thorough understanding of the legal topics discussed.</p><p><br /></p><p>First, statutory damages are only available <b><u>if</u></b> Carr&#039;s works were properly registered with the copyright office within the requisite time period after production of the design.&nbsp; Do we know for a fact that his works are registered or are you making assumptions/making things up again (like you did in other threads with the &quot;whole new HPA&quot; declaration)? The amount of statutory damages also can be modified depending on factors that are beyond the scope of this thread.&nbsp; If not registered, then the question is one of actual damages.</p><p><br /></p><p>Second, the statute concerning costs and attorney&#039;s fees provide that a judge <b><u>may</u></b> award them to a prevailing party based on the judge&#039;s <b><u>discretion</u></b>.&nbsp;&nbsp; It is clearly one of judicial discretion, and up through this year, there was a circuit conflict over the application of the factors that were relevant to the use of this discretion.</p><p><br /></p><p>Third, the Hobby Protection Act and the Title 18 statutes cited in the other threads have nothing to do with copyright law or intellectual property.&nbsp; Of course, we had already established several pages before you graced us with your presence that works produced by government employees acting in the scope of their employment don&#039;t enjoy copyright protection, but the other laws you mention are inapposite to this conclusion.&nbsp; The lack of a copyright over the subject matter does not preclude the government from otherwise regulating use of the subject matter.&nbsp; It is absurd to suggest otherwise.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in