Starship Polaris wrote:
Starship Polaris wrote:
Is it difficult to imagine that he would have no reason to expect that Marvel would take some action? Yes, yes it is.
Expectation is not intent; please do not move the goalposts.
Please do not obfuscate by pretending that importan distinctions exist where none do.
Let me put it this way:
I'm a Resident Assistant at my university, and one of my jobs is, if I see any evidence that someone has been using alcohol or marijuana in my residence hall, to contact my university police department and report those students.
Now, this does not mean that I have the intent
of getting someone in trouble over that issue. If I'm walking down the hall on rounds and I smell alcohol and hear noise coming from Room 247, I'm going to call in the university police -- but I do not have the intent of causing the occupants of Room 247 to get in trouble. There is no desire to cause them problems on my part, and it's nothing personal; it's my job, and I'm morally obligated to do it because I made a promise to help uphold my university's right to control how residents behave on its property. I have no intent
of getting a drinker in trouble -- in point of fact, if my university decided it no longer wished to have such a policy, I'd be pretty happy with that. But it's university property and no one has the right to do something on the university's property that the university doesn't want them to do.
It's the same thing here. David probably thought it was likely that Marvel would send a cease and desist letter to those people who were, in its opinion, violating its copyright by scanning and posting large percentages of a given issue of a comic (and, no, Scans_Daily's 50% rule did not constitute fair use -- you'd have to have a smaller percentage of the issue posted than that). This does not mean that David did it with the intent
of having Marvel do it. As David noted on his blog, if he were to inform Marvel about S_D and they were to reply, "Yeah, we know about that, and we don't want to do anything about it because we consider it free advertising," then he would have had no beef with that -- because it's their property
Further, neither David nor Marvel necessarily knew or thought likely that LiveJournal would just delete Scans_Daily en masse. There's a rumor going around that upon investigating the specific copyright violation that David reported, which was apparently yanked before Marvel got there, they found another copyright violation and sent a C&D about that specific set of images to LJ. In Marvel's mind, it's entirely possible that doing a C&D about a few specific sets of images didn't constitute grounds for deleting the entire community, and that they would not have minded Scans continuing so long as posters didn't put up such large percentages of an issue. LiveJournal being corporate actors with a larger abundance of caution than is necessary, their reaction to a C&D citing a specific set of images is to delete the entire community.
It's not an unimportant distinction, bottom line. Reporting a copyright violation to the owner does not mean intent to have images deleted (since the owner could say, "It's cool by me") and seeking to have a set of images deleted does not constitute a desire to delete the entire Scans community.
But, hey, if you'd rather just paint David as the villain instead of just acknowledging that if the community members and mods at Scans hadn't been blatantly violating the fair use principle the community would still be around, knock yourself out.