Gay Cruising Area North Carolina

warning d. U + C Lawyers for copyright infringement on behalf of the film distribution Silwa AG for the movie file sharing "Vivian Schmitt": 650, - sweeping claims

U + C Lawyers also send warning letters in 2010 because of continued copyright infringement. Currently, on behalf of Silwa warned Film Vertriebs AG films of the series "Vivian Schmitt". Here, a standard compensation of 650, - € is invoked.

warning d. U + C Lawyers for copyright infringement on behalf of the film distribution Silwa AG for the movie file sharing "Vivian should have been - "sweeping claims

By letter of 04.01.2010 obtain current subscriber to the Internet via the pornographic film 650," Vivian Schmitt "and downloaded as part of the P2P network simultaneously offered to upload, Schmitt 33cm! from the U + C lawyers (Urman + colleague lawyers) from Regensburg, a warning of copyright infringement.

Those affected will be advised on the grounds that as a user of the P2P network by downloading and simultaneously offering the film rights of the U + C to have violated lawyers represented rights holders Silwa film distribution AG. This had Company Copy Right Solutions GmbH, based in Switzerland, found and documented proof safe.

To prove the offense following data indicate:

date

file

IP address

P2P network: eg ekaden

original product name

not specified, the filehash, the GUID and information on the scope of the pre allegedly downloaded movie file. Furthermore, it is not confirmed that should have been and to what extent the film supposedly allows for upload.

The U + C Lawyers ask the parties for damages and reimbursement for legal fees in a lump sum of 650, - €.

Furthermore, it is required to deliver an imitator, which would provide for a penalty and refers to the actual film.

Legal note the following:

• Connection owner is not already so responsible as spoilers for copyright infringement because it is Anschlussinhabear. When nuisance liability different constellations can be distinguished. It should be noted that the nuisance liability does not include pure strict liability, but requires the violation of acceptable auditing requirements, the nature and extent adjusted themselves to the circumstances judge of the case. Basically it is: in the question of whether due to be made according to objective criteria reasonableness considerations which are to be expected as spoilers claimed control and monitoring measures regarding the direct perpetrator acting unlawfully. This depends on the circumstances of each case.

  is important that the connection holders of its burden of proof with regard to potential infringers, taken precautionary measures and technical compliance "parental control obligations" fulfill in order to escape the nuisance liability. Not infrequently, the connection shall be liable namely, the mere fact that, because the Verteidungsschrift not to the facts is received and exhausted only in legal argument. A typical example of a totally inadequate submissions this is the recent decision of the OLG Köln 23.12.2009 (6 U 101/09) In that event, the connection owner, according to the Senate, nothing presented to it, who after their knowledge could have committed the violation. They would be considered by the Senate, however, obliged to procedural principles. It did not remotely located, that her husband had used the port because many older titles were offered for download. It is also remained unclear, which could have used the children to the port. Also have the port owner does not explain whether sufficient technical backups were set up on their computer, such as a firewall that had a download can prevent or to set up user accounts with limited rights. "

• often fails due to the alleged omission and claim for damages already in my view, inadequate or lack of provable evidence of copyright infringement. In my opinion, it is doubtful whether the evidence of the substantive identity of the copy with the original film the submitted information may be performed. Even more so, if only parts of the movie have been downloaded. Please do
  
• is that with the warnings of the U + C Lawyers often follow warnings threaten. Any alleged copyright infringement on a single film is made in this case the subject of a warning to. It is not uncommon that clients are confronted with several warnings of the U + C Lawyers However, there are legal ways to meet impact warnings, the more warnings are inadmissible.
  
• should never lightly affected the prepared cease and desist letter signed. This also includes the obligation to pay. Writes the person under the prepared and desist, "the defenses are usually futile.
  
• Whether a comparatively agreement is in question, the assessment is reserved for individual cases.

Christian Weiner, LL.M. (Media Law) *

lawyer

* Master of Laws (media law)

www.ra-weiner.de

Note: REGISTRY WEINER represents as a specialist on the Copyright and Media Law Firm nationwide legal interests of Connection holders who have received a warning letter for copyright infringement.

via anwalt24.de

Posted by email from Joerg's posterous

(c) by Joerg Hochwald