Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Was DMCA ignore hosts allowed here?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Was DMCA ignore hosts allowed here?

I thought it didn't allowed when I first read the rules. Was it changed recently?

«13

Comments

  • pikepike Veteran

    DMCA ignored is just a marketing term. Any sane host will kick you on the first valid abusemail, be it copyright related or not.

    Thanked by 1DewlanceVPS
  • CrandolphCrandolph Member
    edited March 2018

    No host is really DMCA ignored. Specifically the ones that advertise it.

    It's more or rather shunned upon for the general stupidity of it.

  • You could call every non-US based providers DMCA ingnored since most of them don't care and they don't have to

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    We happily ignore DMCA take down requests... Just so long as the reports are bogus. There are no safe harbor for copy right infringement

  • EwokEwok Member
    edited March 2018

    There are no safe harbor for copy right infringement

    Rather bold statement considering there is at least 2 well established providers on here who'll ignore DMCAs

  • randvegeta said: We happily ignore DMCA takedown requests... Just so long as the reports are bogus. There are no safe harbor for copyright infringement

    How will you divide copyright and non-copyright content? Just interesting.
    I know some company which just trolling and sending over 100k reports already to all inside specialized market of some product. They do not even HAVE any rights, they just a company which is hired to take down all market and take monopoly over the product. And what do you think? Around 80% or more companies WITHOUT ANY EXTRA STEPS just taking down hosts. No one even care is request legit or not, they just turning off the server with content and banning their customers.

    So, my question is next:

    • How providers divide legal requests from non-legal? Can you show any legal request (with hidden names of course) and nonlegal one? What is a difference?

    Because in my experience, and experience of all people who I know in my small hobby project, that everyone had the same problem like I'm facing, and only really big companies have very well tuned plan how to work with these fake / real requests.

    Thanked by 2ricardo mksh
  • ricardoricardo Member
    edited March 2018

    ^ Fact. I suppose only a moderator/admin can clarify the forum's position. AFAIK they aren't keen on a hosting provider using it as a selling point.

    Thanked by 1omelas
  • AidanAidan Member

    desperand said: 100k reports

    If I received 100K reports, I'd label it as abuse & request the reports to be consolidated.

    desperand said: How providers divide legal requests from non-legal?

    That's really not up to the provider to decide, bias here will lose them their safe harbour status - though smaller hosts might have their own policies.


    If you receive a false DMCA takedown notice, then lodge a counter-notice stating that the takedown request is invalid - the issue will be resolved 99.9% of the time.

    (The above-mentioned was written assuming you're in the clear. If you're actually infringing someone's copyright then filing a counter-notice will have you up shit creek without a paddle.)

  • There are few hosts here that completely ignore DMCA but not the european copyright equiviliment.

  • ITT: ignoring DMCA != ignoring infringement

    Thanked by 1randvegeta
  • teamaccteamacc Member
    edited March 2018

    @Aidan said:

    desperand said: 100k reports

    If I received 100K reports, I'd label it as abuse & request the reports to be consolidated.

    In their defense, they're probably sending it to [email protected].

    Thanked by 1Aidan
  • deankdeank Member, Troll

    If I received 100k reports, I'd be PMSing over the client.

    Thanked by 1Aidan
  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    Ewok said: Rather bold statement considering there is at least 2 well established providers on here who'll ignore DMCAs

    Upstreams drop traffic if your servers are actually hosting copyright content. I cannot think of a single host that actually allows the hosting of actual copyright material.

    Linking and other stuff is different because that may not be explicitly illegal in some countries. Obviously I'm talking about blatant hosting of copyright material with no means of removal. File hosts are the closest thing, but they do actually tend to remove content on demand.

    desperand said: How will you divide copyright and non-copyright content? Just interesting.

    The number of bogus reports we get is really quite surprising. Basically a 3rd party company sends us a DMCA or similar take down request, but then they provide 0 proof of infringement, let alone that they have the rights to the content they claim is being infringed.

    Many of the requests are automated and we basically now ignore automated requests since it's almost always non-sense. The most common nuisance take down requests basically provide the domain of a website that is allegedly infringing someones copyright. But the reporter does NOT:

    a.) Provide a direct link to the location of the material for us to actually verify.
    b.) State the IP of the server for which the infringement is allegedgly taking place.
    c.) Provide any kind of instruction to reproduce or verify the infringement.

    In 90% of cases, the websites are behind CloudFlare and so we do not know which IP they are referring to. And when we actively tried to follow up with the requests, most of the sites actually were not actually hosting any copyright material at all. In most cases, it would be something like a screenshot, or posters or a link to youtube or something, so all the media was hosted off-server any way.

    The reporters seem to think that the hosts should do the investigation for them, when they can't even be bothered to actually do any themselves. So now all automated reports get ignored entirely, and we insist on having all the evidence provided to us before we take action. If the client is indeed violating some laws of any kind (in HK), then we take action right away. But if the reporter doesn't do everything they can to make our lives easier to verify their claims, then they basically just cant be bothered. And if they cant be bothered, why should we?

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    @iwaswrongonce said:
    ITT: ignoring DMCA != ignoring infringement

    Totally. Technically any non USA based host can 100% ignore DMCA take down requests. But the term DMCA is now synonymous with Copyright Infringement notification, which most hosts cannot ignore. I mean, they can technically ignore it, but most treat it the same as their local equivalent.

    DMCA is more ambiguous than some country's copyright laws.

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited March 2018

    @randvegeta said:

    @iwaswrongonce said:
    ITT: ignoring DMCA != ignoring infringement

    Totally. Technically any non USA based host can 100% ignore DMCA take down requests. But the term DMCA is now synonymous with Copyright Infringement notification, which most hosts cannot ignore. I mean, they can technically ignore it, but most treat it the same as their local equivalent.

    DMCA is more ambiguous than some country's copyright laws.

    Are you sure ? I’d argue that the DMCA takedown request is a notification under EU copyright directives. This in turn prevents your defence as a hosting provider that you didn’t knew what the contents were as you’ve now been informed. If you don’t take action to prevent the copyright violation you can be sued along your Client as being complicit.

    Whether said notification is called ‘DMCA takedown’ or ‘To Whom It May Concern’ doesn’t really matter.

    Do read the actual law.

    Thanked by 1Aidan
  • ricardo said:

    ^ Fact. I suppose only a moderator/admin can clarify the forum's position. AFAIK they aren't keen on a hosting provider using it as a selling point.

    That was basically Jarland's approach when he was adminning the site. I.e. he he didn't care what people were doing as long as they weren't blatant about it. That seemed fine to me.

    If we -really- want to cleanse the forum of eeeeevil pirates the first thing to do is ban all the storage server providers, since we all know what LET members fill those servers with. Heh.

  • willie said: If we -really- want to cleanse the forum of eeeeevil pirates the first thing to do is ban all the storage server providers, since we all know what LET members fill those servers with. Heh.

    Yes, I think he liked a bit of don't ask, don't tell.

  • desperand said: So, my question is next: - How providers divide legal requests from non-legal? Can you show any legal request (with hidden names of course) and nonlegal one? What is a difference?

    Pay more for a provider than under $7/mo

  • deankdeank Member, Troll

    I think 7/mo is a lot for LET lowbies nowadays. It's 1/year.

    Thanked by 3mksh lazyt willie
  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    @Clouvider said:

    @randvegeta said:

    @iwaswrongonce said:
    ITT: ignoring DMCA != ignoring infringement

    Totally. Technically any non USA based host can 100% ignore DMCA take down requests. But the term DMCA is now synonymous with Copyright Infringement notification, which most hosts cannot ignore. I mean, they can technically ignore it, but most treat it the same as their local equivalent.

    DMCA is more ambiguous than some country's copyright laws.

    Are you sure ? I’d argue that the DMCA takedown request is a notification under EU copyright directives. This in turn prevents your defence as a hosting provider that you didn’t knew what the contents were as you’ve now been informed. If you don’t take action to prevent the copyright violation you can be sued along your Client as being complicit.

    Whether said notification is called ‘DMCA takedown’ or ‘To Whom It May Concern’ doesn’t really matter.

    Do read the actual law.

    Yes I'm sure. Again, if you read what I said, most hosts may simply treat it as the same as the equivalent laws in their own countries. But DMCA is specific to the US. The specifics laws of each country prevails as US law is not world law.

    Being informed of copyright infringement is not the same as being informed of a crime if you don't know the alleged act is a crime. You're not responsible for the actions of others and have no obligation to act unless you know a crime is being committed. A DMCA notice does not specify which laws have been violated or what responsibilities and liabilities the host has. Of course if it's blatant copyright infringement then it's generally expected that everyone knows what that means so people treat DMCA the same in most cases. But what about for nuanced cases? It's not obvious and so we must look at local laws, not just DMCA.

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited March 2018

    I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. Please re-read what I posted and try to understand that the headline of the document doesn’t matter. The contents do and they are very much sufficient to make you culpable under EU directives.

    Or keep ignoring it. One can always learn the hard way at the expense of their Customers.

    Thanked by 1Zen
  • @Clouvider said:
    I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. Please re-read what I posted and try to understand that the headline of the document doesn’t matter. The contents do and they are very much sufficient to make you culpable under EU directives.

    Or keep ignoring it. One can always learn the hard way at the expense of their Customers.

    he's in Hong Kong(asia) not in EU, maybe law works differently there.

  • Clouvider said: One can always learn the hard way at the expense of their Customers.

    Can you name any LET host who has had significant legal problems over anything like this? I get the impression that some have been booted from their upstreams, but that's more at the level of "oh well, it was nice while it lasted". Many things in life are that way and people are used to it. Yes Kim Dotcom got in trouble, but he was massively taunting the system rather than quietly minding his knitting like most LET hosts try to do.

    I do know that Scihub continues to operate despite years of court cases, injunctions, etc. I don't know what will eventually happen with it, but I think it shows there are no foregone conclusions.

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited March 2018

    @omelas said:

    @Clouvider said:
    I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. Please re-read what I posted and try to understand that the headline of the document doesn’t matter. The contents do and they are very much sufficient to make you culpable under EU directives.

    Or keep ignoring it. One can always learn the hard way at the expense of their Customers.

    he's in Hong Kong(asia) not in EU, maybe law works differently there.

    He has a DC in Lithuania IIRC and that's in the EU.

  • Selectel.ru

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    willie said: Can you name any LET host who has had significant legal problems over anything like this?

    I don't care.

  • omelasomelas Member
    edited March 2018

    @Clouvider said:
    He has a DC in Lithuania IIRC and that's in the EU.

    @randvegeta said:
    DMCA is more ambiguous than some(bolded my me) country's copyright laws.

    Well, he said some contury, so it doesn't need to be EU one. if you can ignore DMCA in HK (or any other place, like Russia) then his statement is true.

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    @Clouvider said:
    I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. Please re-read what I posted and try to understand that the headline of the document doesn’t matter. The contents do and they are very much sufficient to make you culpable under EU directives.

    Or keep ignoring it. One can always learn the hard way at the expense of their Customers.

    You seriously have a reading problem. Or one with English. Probably both. Very unprofessional.

    Protocol matters. Communication matters. As I said, if the host is made aware of a violation of applicable laws, they must take action. Otherwise they don't. If I send you a take down report in Chinese, that doesn't count as a report. Not everyone speaks or understands the same language. You are a clear example of reading and understanding only what you want to.

  • deankdeank Member, Troll
    edited March 2018

    I long for the space age where future LET jackasses will talk about Earthian, Martian, and Venusian laws...

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    @Clouvider said:

    willie said: Can you name any LET host who has had significant legal problems over anything like this?

    I don't care.

    You don't care about law or jurisdiction. That much is obvious.

This discussion has been closed.