Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
thanks for the information and good post.
Perhaps you can briefly touch on the other subject at hand ( 2257 etc )
I agree it is not your job to "police" the content of your partners, but i think its rather obvious you must use some "personal" judgment when you approve sites.
If a site wanted to use ccbill and had what appeared to be 7 year olds fucking would you approve it simply because it wasn't PROVEN to be 7 year olds, obviously not. Ok so lets bump up that age to 8 then 9 etc
If a site wanted to use/was using ccbill and had PLAYBOY.COM stamped in huge bold letters across every picture are you saying you wouldnt have an issue with that until a copyright holder stepped forward to complain ? i think not.. thats favortism right there isn't it ?
"The court also decided that CCBill has no right or ability to determine on its own whether or not a particular site is infringing."
so if i read that correctly you are forced to allow me to use ccbill to process obviously stolen content, that if i ask you to process for my site of blatantly watermarked and well known stolen pictures you will allow it ?
|
smokey, the underage issue, our review guys wouldn?t allow so that?s a different issue.
We have to follow the law here and do what our attorneys say. Our policy review department cant make the determination on who controls the rights/license/copyright to a particular piece of content and we have to rely on the DMCAs notification feature to inform us.
We want to take illegally infringing sites down as much as you do, but we have to follow the mechanisms of the law and get proper notification from the copyright holder. But once we get a dmca notice, we will act immediately.
__________________
If you need a good company for check writing services, then check out
checkissuing, and for webhosting, check out Phoenix NAP