| |||||||||||||
Security quotes of the weekSecurity quotes of the weekPosted Sep 8, 2012 20:34 UTC (Sat) by ncm (subscriber, #165)Parent article: Security quotes of the week
The system appears to be Working As Designed.
But isn't there a prescribed way, under the law, to make the putative content owner pay a penalty for falsely claiming ownership? Isn't there a business opportunity there? And the "service" that reports "violations" ... don't they have a responsibility to their customers not to expose them to liability like this? I.e. they should be indemnifying their customers and paying the penalties themselves.
Maybe an injunction is in order, until these "services" can develop some scruples.
(Log in to post comments)
Security quotes of the week Posted Sep 9, 2012 7:52 UTC (Sun) by Seegras (subscriber, #20463) [Link]
DMCA claims are made under oath. So yes, your rogue bot technically opens you to lawsuits for perjury. The problem is, nobody being falsely accused of copyright infringement opened such a lawsuit yet.
Security quotes of the week Posted Sep 10, 2012 0:52 UTC (Mon) by Fowl (subscriber, #65667) [Link]
The problem is that these bots aren't making DCMA claims, theyr're just participating in an entirely voluntary process invented by the provider.
Obviously there is coercion/pressure being placed on providers by rights-holders to implement these systems, although I would have thought the providers would be very wary about waiving their safe harbour protections by interfering in this way.
|
|||||||||||||