Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I don't think your position would be very compelling in court. By analogy you could argue that adding a movie to your hard drive is 'commenting on it' because its inclusion represents an implicit comment of liking it. And the courts have already ruled on that. Basically I find it hard to believe that you will get away with copying something by arguing you like it and that's a comment. If you could anyone could copy anything.



I disagree, I think the situation you're talking about sounds like the classical napster/kazaa/bitorrent kid with a ton of songs on their hard drive who is ripe for legal action, whereas the pinterest situation -- even in a worst-case martial-law scenario -- is more like you've streamed a movie to your hard drive from Youku or something like that.

The end user, when they don't have anything sitting in their house, is much less liable to be prosecuted.


The difference, though, is that adding something to your favorites is simply adding it to a list; copying is incidental.

Adding a movie to your harddrive by necessity requires the act of copying.

And in the courtroom, that distinction makes all the difference.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: