The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Skip:

IANAL, but going and reading the text of the law, CEP@239 certainly appears to be correct.

So my question would be "Is a purported DMCA takedown notice without 'the statement under penalty of purjury that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed' substantially compliant?

3 possibilities here:

1 - Yes it is, and there is an implied 'statement of accuracy under penalty of perjry'.
2 - Yes it is, and there is no such implied statement.
3 - No it isn't.

Only in circumstance 2 would the SFWA be in the clear. And I'd be surprised if the courts allowed such a hole, but the courts have surprised me before.

I've passed out, oh, approximately 100% of the time I've given blood. I know it's coming, it doesn't concern me, but I always warn the nurse. I don't think it's the blood loss, though, because I also have passed out just having an IV run before surgery.

The doctor said at that point, that it's something like you're uptight about the needles, and you force yourself to relax, and overcompensate.

Adam@#11: Don't forget, if the Computer Engineer is from Microsoft, he'll need you to close all the windows first.

Comment statistics for Skip on the Making Light blog

Total: 3 comments. View all these comments on a single page.