Quote:
Originally Posted by d-null
not a lawyer, but perhaps their lawyers could argue that they are just a filehost and that the onus for documentation falls on the uploaders?
just a guess, but as an example, I don't think google could ever be required to have 2257 documentation even though their image search is full of porn  |
Yes that is a grey area but that not exactly what I meant (poor explanation on my part)
The users who supposedly produced and uploaded the "user generated content" will defiantly need to be able to produce the 2257 documentation. If we assume that the owner of the site is the one stealing and uploading the movies.
Then that means that he would be in a legal catch 22 situation.
Admit to not knowing where the records can be found and risk being charged as a sex offender.
Or he could provide them the 2257 url of the affiliate program that he stole the content from and be charged with copyright infringement.