This is another defense that was mentioned in the White Paper: The Supreme Court has stated that “[a] successful defense of a copyright infringement action may further the policies of the Copyright Act every bit as much as a successful prosecution of an infringement claim by the holder of the copyright.” There are a number of legal and equitable defenses available to defendents in copyright infringement actions. Fair use is the most common of the defenses.
Others include misuse of copyright by the copyright owner, abandonment of copyright, estoppel, collateral estoppel, laches, res judicata, acquiescence, and unclean hands.” In this case, the court reviewed the applicability of estoppel, and mapped the four part test for estoppel to the facts: Field knew of Google’s conduct; Field intended that Google rely upon his conduct , Google was ignorant of the true facts and Google detrimentally relied on Field’s conduct.
Under this fact pattern, the court found that Field was aware of Google’s caching practices, and that by not putting in appropriate metatags, Field in fact intended Google to cache his web page. Further, since Field did not use the metatags, nor did he avail himself of Google’s removal tool, Google had no reason to know that Field objected to the caching of his web page, and in reliance on this behavior, Google cached the web page. Thus, all four estoppel factors were present and met. The Court noted that when a use is found to be transformative, the "commercial" nature of the use is of less importance in analyzing the first fair use factor. Since Google's use is transformative, the court gave little weight to this subfactor.
And pertinent to our discussion here is the Cached link, which is a hyperlink to the representation of the website in Google’s cache. The cache is refreshed approximately every fourteen to twenty days. Our may be right for you if,Your company's customer loyalty program has become stagnant. You're looking to implement an innovative employee reward program
No comments:
Post a Comment