Not bad people, not bad
You all missed the obvious though.
Here are my observations and the findings of my "investigation":
Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal claims to be representing "RSCLegacy", however there is no indication that this is in fact a company, no reference or contact information to said organisation and as far as I can tell is a brand name, with no proof that it is actually anyone's brand having been offered.
Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal has failed to provide suitable contact and validation information. There is no data here that allows HPC:Factor to validate that he is in fact a representative of RSCLegacy, either directly or as an appointment. No contact information for a law firm. Nor has Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal made contact via an email address on the rsclegacy.com domian. Something that no reputable law firm would allow to happen - offering an indication of precisely what I think of Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal
The information that is alleged to be copied to this site for which "RSCLegacy" claims to own copyright can be found at www.rsclegacy.com. DMCA requires that conclusive proof be offered of the infringed material. Giving a root web address and saying "it's on here somewhere" is like saying "well it's in the US library of congress somewhere".
Claiming that infringement is occurring on www.rsclegacy.com while www.rsclegacy.com is a non-working HTTP server, with an error page an no actual content proves nothing
Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal claims that user Grasshopper has violated copyright by stating "http://www.rsclegacy.com <--- a private version of it's original form that still runs for free, this is old school MUD based graphics.
(This has potential to run
)". As far as I can tell Grasshopper has created a hyperlink to a PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE domain name, listed in WHOIS and accessible via Google. I would like very much to see Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal claim to a judge that a domain name with a ASCII arrow next to it and a comment about use on a legacy H/PC is first party content and there-in that its reproduction damages their brand
Section 512
(d
) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(”DMCA”
) states that hyperlinking to content does not constitute a copyright infringement
Fair use permits the use of domain names
Trademark fair use allows the use of public brand identities, including domain names provided there is no defacement of the identity. There was none here.
Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal has failed to satisfy even the simplest of Burden of Proof tests
www.rsclegacy.com was last registered at 2016-08-22 18:22:59. The post being cited was created at 2010-05-08 09:23, clearly making this an attempt at historic revisionism on the public Internet. Something that will not stand.
Therefore it seems very clear to me, based on other DMCA information on Google surrounding that domain name that someone is attempting undertake revisionism with the desired ambition seemingly to be that they want to remove all historic references to the PUBLIC domain name either to clean up what they were doing with it, to flush away legacy so that it can be re-used for something else or for some other nefarious purpose. None of which I care for in the least. This is why I have posted a new hyperlink to
http://www.rsclegacy.com in every single post I have made here. Had Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal approached me without resorting to threats, in a constructive fashion, may be this would have turned out differently for him. However I do not and never have responded well to threats made against this site and our community.
And the final thing that the imminently "capable" Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal seems to have missed in his extremely poor attempt to edit the Internet... and I
really want to emphasise this as being the starting point of your failure here Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act does not apply outside the United States of America. The last time I checked, the US Government had not yet succeeded in becoming a unilateral Global legislature and therefore threatening a European website with fabricated nonsense is going to help you get what you want about as much as trying to throw stones over the Atlantic from the east coast of Maine.
If the actual copyright holder of RSCLegacy has a genuine issue that they want to discuss with this site - an issue that has legitimate legal foundation. Then either they or a partner in your firm
(not you Mr. Brian Jackson Paralegal
) should get in contact. Without making legal threats, they should try again to explain the situation. This site takes matters of copyright and IP seriously; just as seriously as we do attempts to violate and repress free speech or create a revisionist interpretation of the Internet. If there is legitimate cause, then we will hear it.
As you can see, I have with "deliberate speed" "investigate[d]" the matter and made a public domain disclosure on the findings of that investigation. We find no user of this community at fault. No content will be removed from this site unless a properly qualified, properly formatted and reasonable request is levied to us. No remedial action will be taken against any user. As this is not a US site, the content will not be removed for a 14 day remedial period subject to counter action and hpcfactor.com will not be wasting any time filing a counter notice as the DMCA has no jurisdiction in this territory to begin with.
