However, DMCA safe harbors do not shield those operators who themselves take part in..
I must have missed this part in the story. Was there proof that this was happening? Does it even require proof-- or like everything else regarding IP, does it only require an allegation?
...or have knowledge of the infringement.
I was under the impression (from what little I know of Viacom v. Youtube) that knowing there is infringing material in the meta sense (e.g., Youtube almost definitely has infringing material on it right now, but I'm not sure what) is not enough to lose your safe harbors. I thought it was determined that the service provider needed to know about specific instances of infringement and do nothing to lose those safe harbors. Further, if this site did adhere to DMCA takedown requests (the only *real* and legally binding way to know if something you host is infringing) then it stands to reason that they still have their safe harbors, and are therefore, as the poster you replied to said, 100% legal.
Am I incorrect in my logic and/or understanding of these things?
Can you please elaborate? I was under the impression that section 230 of the DMCA said that if you complied with takedown notices then you were not punished for the actions of your users.
He wanted to attempt it and our government helped him attempt it. I, personally, am more concerned with those people who don't need our government's help to attempt mass murder. They should try and stop *those* people.
I have been meaning to read your stuff for a while, but can't ever seem to find a way to contact you. I still don't see how to contact you on your blog.
Now that I'm done with the latest WoT book, I'm in the market for something to read.
...and if he only managed to blow himself up trying to make a bomb out of shotgun shells and thumb tacks? You are loading the question, as is evident by the "including women and children" tomfoolery you typed. (Honestly, you think age or gender make a life more or less valuable?)
Try this: Every dollar and man-hour wasted turning this misguided bastard into a threat just to have the chance to stop said threat is a dollar and a man-hour that *should* have been used actually making America safer.
You, my friend, are quite a paradox. You manage to get to TechDirt.com day after day, let can't seem to operate a simple web broswer.
I can only assume that someone in your life told you that asking questions indicates a form of cognitive ability-- what you need to learn is that the questions can be to yourself, and you can use the tools you obviously have on hand (e.g., the internet) to answer them yourself.
..because tweeting and heroin (no, 'e', friend, unless you meant a female hero) are comparable? Try and stay focused here, druggie. :)
My point was that you can't use the explanation "It makes my experience worse" because the other person can say "It makes my experience better." Who decides whose experience should be catered to, and why?
On the post: New Judicial Hero: Philip Gutierrez Goes Ballistic On Ridiculous Gov't Prosecutors During Xbox Modding Trial
Re: I has a happy.
PS- I like to mix metaphors, so what? :)
On the post: If Newly Seized Domains Were Purely Dedicated To Infringement, Why Was Kanye West Using One?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
However, DMCA safe harbors do not shield those operators who themselves take part in..
I must have missed this part in the story. Was there proof that this was happening? Does it even require proof-- or like everything else regarding IP, does it only require an allegation?
...or have knowledge of the infringement.
I was under the impression (from what little I know of Viacom v. Youtube) that knowing there is infringing material in the meta sense (e.g., Youtube almost definitely has infringing material on it right now, but I'm not sure what) is not enough to lose your safe harbors. I thought it was determined that the service provider needed to know about specific instances of infringement and do nothing to lose those safe harbors. Further, if this site did adhere to DMCA takedown requests (the only *real* and legally binding way to know if something you host is infringing) then it stands to reason that they still have their safe harbors, and are therefore, as the poster you replied to said, 100% legal.
Am I incorrect in my logic and/or understanding of these things?
On the post: If Newly Seized Domains Were Purely Dedicated To Infringement, Why Was Kanye West Using One?
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Wi-Lan Just Keeps On Suing; Says Cable Modems Infringe Its Patents Too
Progress
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: FBI Celebrates That It Prevented FBI's Own Bomb Plot
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: FBI Portland bust
On the post: Irony: Ebook About Clueless Media Moguls Costs Many Times Brand New Hardcover Version
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now that I'm done with the latest WoT book, I'm in the market for something to read.
On the post: FBI Celebrates That It Prevented FBI's Own Bomb Plot
Re: Re: Re: Re: FBI Portland bust
Try this: Every dollar and man-hour wasted turning this misguided bastard into a threat just to have the chance to stop said threat is a dollar and a man-hour that *should* have been used actually making America safer.
On the post: If Newly Seized Domains Were Purely Dedicated To Infringement, Why Was Kanye West Using One?
Re: Re: Re: problematic
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
She's saying that racial profiling doesn't work when the bad men are the same race as the good men. That's why they use behavioral profiling.
See? It doesn't sting too much to agree with sanity, does it?
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re:
I can only assume that someone in your life told you that asking questions indicates a form of cognitive ability-- what you need to learn is that the questions can be to yourself, and you can use the tools you obviously have on hand (e.g., the internet) to answer them yourself.
Try it, it's quite liberating. :)
On the post: Obama 'Considering Legal Action' Against Wikileaks
Re:
On the post: While TSA Looks At You Naked, Child Finds Loaded Gun Magazine Left On Southwest Plane
Re:
On the post: While TSA Looks At You Naked, Child Finds Loaded Gun Magazine Left On Southwest Plane
Re:
On the post: UK Lawyers Who Originated 'Pay Up Or We'll Sue' Knew They Were Threatening Innocents
Re: Re: I've worked it out
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
Re:
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
Re: Re: Re:
My point was that you can't use the explanation "It makes my experience worse" because the other person can say "It makes my experience better." Who decides whose experience should be catered to, and why?
On the post: Cooks Source 'Apology' Really A Rant Blaming The Woman It Copied For Daring To Tell People
Re:
On the post: TSA Defending Its Groin Grabbing Or Naked Image Security Techniques
Re:
Next >>