Sentence examples for infringing acts from inspiring English sources

Mr Justice Arnold said in a written judgment in February: "In my judgment, the operators of [The Pirate Bay] do authorise its users' infringing acts of copying and communication to the public.

The final letter, a copy of which has been obtained by the BBC, reads: "In the event that you were not responsible for the infringing acts outlined above, for example, another member of your household was the user of the computer, you should make full disclosure to us of the other parties at your residence using your internet connection".

Under your reading of the claim as set out in your letters, the allegedly infringing acts require the use of Apple APIs to provide two-way communication, the transmission of an Apple ID and other services to permit access for the user to the App store, and the use of Apple's hardware, iOS, and servers.

"Megaupload Limited caused and effected the infringing acts of providing copies of those works to its users, and promoted additional infringement by providing the uploading user a URL link that allowed anyone with the link to access the file".

Can someone be held liable for the infringing acts of others?

This view was taken to its logical conclusion by the 20th century American philosopher Robert Nozick, who held that the state ought to let the poor die rather than fund a welfare state, as this would require infringing "consenting acts of capitalism".

The act is clear that such notices should only be sent to those hosting infringing files; if the content did infringe the act (and it clearly doesn't), then YouTube should have received the notice.

You might recall that when former Attorney General Ashcroft wanted to re-institute provisions of the Patriot Act, he used the rationale that no one had thus far made any complaints about the Patriot Act infringing on their civil liberties.

Tumblr already bans blogs which encourage self-harm, but, in common with most other social networks, only acts when infringing accounts are brought to its attention.

Consequences are also a factor; if, as in Hubbard v Vosper, the parties to the case are competitors and infringing on the work acts as an alternative to purchasing the original, this will limit the fairness of the dealing.

They are following at least the letter of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, removing infringing material at the copyright holder's request.