[LINK] Liability of Publisher v. ISP/Space-Lessor
eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au
Wed Dec 22 16:21:06 EST 2004
On 22/12/04 12:26 PM, "Roger Clarke" <Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au> wrote:
> Delhi police officials have defended their action. They were merely
> upholding a comparatively new law preventing the spread of
> pornographic material, they said.
> [So shouldn't they prosecute the publisher?]
if I run a newsagent in QLD, and try to sell some XXX mags there ... I'm not
the publisher, but I can still get in trouble, right?
> Although public transmission and sale of pornography is a crime,
> possession and viewing are not. Pornographic videos - often of dire
> quality - are available in most Indian cities, where there is a
> flourishing underground trade.
> [On that basis, *only* the publisher is liable]
"sale" can be done by more than just the publisher .. and since eBay/Baazee
takes a commission in the sale they have skin in the game, so to speak.
More information about the Link