Quote:
Originally Posted by DareRing
Strawman argument. Noone is suggesting that they boot anyone after an unjustified complaint. The equation is simple. One webmaster has IDs and documents. The other webmaster has nothing. Case closed. No records, no processing, should be the rule.
|
but it is not that cut and dry. Let say one webmaster has the docs but lives in a country with clear privacy laws (PIPEDA - in canada) which prevents you from releasing private information like id. If you give them a free pass, CCBILL would become liable if they happen to be taking advantage of that free pass (since they are going above level required by law, and raising the expected level of compliance). If they do not give them a free pass then those customers who have a perfectly legal reason to keep the info private would be prevented from doing business with CCBILL. If the company choose to do business with CCBILL, and got sued by the model for violating her privacy (under canadian law it just a one page complaint to the PIPEDA board) that company could sue CCBILL for those fines (10K per instance).
Now i know i am using canadian privacy laws as an example, but may states in the US also have similar privacy laws. While governments are exempt (2257) private business would not be.
Quote:
|
The current situation has one CCBill client stealing from another CCBill client. I think CCBill clients already pay enough to expect some effort on their part to prevent this. A one-time doc request when adding new sites is not too much to ask. It's neither expensive nor time consuming, and would prevent so much piracy, there's no excuse not to do it.
|
You have already mentioned that were happy with all their services at the current price point. IF you truely expected this extra service as part of your current fee, you would have left ccbill, paid someone else to do all the extra work, and use the surplus profit to add services like removemycontent.com.
There is always a huge legal liablity for going above and beyond what the law requires you to do, because you always potentially infringing on someone elses rights without being forced too by some legal justification. That action is a choice and you would have to accept the liability for it.