Answer: the answer is A
Step-by-step explanation:
The correct answer is:
A. Yes. Intent to infringe is not an element to a copyright action. Of course, damages will not be as great as if intent is proven.
Step-by-step explanation:
In a copyright infringement case, the copyright holder generally has a legitimate claim for infringement, even if the use of copyrighted material was accidental or unintentional. Copyright law protects the exclusive rights of the copyright owner, and the unauthorized use of copyrighted material without permission constitutes infringement.
Intent to infringe is not a necessary element for a copyright action. The focus is on whether the copyrighted material was used without authorization, regardless of the intent of the infringer. However, intent can be relevant in determining the extent of damages awarded to the copyright holder. If the infringement is deemed to be willful or intentional, the court may award higher damages to the copyright owner.
Option B is incorrect because a copyright holder can seek both an injunction (to stop the infringing activity) and money damages in a copyright infringement case, regardless of whether intent is proven.
Option C is incorrect because accidental or unintentional use of copyrighted material is not considered an affirmative defense in a copyright infringement case. It does not excuse the infringement, although it might be considered when assessing the severity of the violation and the appropriate damages.
Option D is incorrect because federal copyright law does not explicitly require the copyright holder to prove intentional misuse. The focus is on whether the infringement occurred and whether the infringer's actions fall within the scope of the exclusive rights granted to the copyright owner. Intent may be considered for damages, but it is not a requirement to establish copyright infringement.