Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
there are no such privacy laws saying ccbill must process for underage porn, sorry try again
|
never said there was
you however want them to randomly pick a video and ask them for documentation for that video. By definition random means they could pick a video that has nothing to do with kiddie porn (ie milf)
Quote:
|
nobody is suggesting they do.
|
but you want them too, the act of making me produce documentation for 3 random videos would in fact do just that. I would have to violate the privacy rights of those models by releasing their private information to a non governmental third party.
remember consequence of not showing the id in the kiddie porn example is ccbill reports you to the appropriate authorities (hense a government authority is requesting the ids)
Quote:
|
wrong and wrong, firstly the 2 go hand in hand, without proof of ownership how can you possibly verify if any of the models are 18, you cant , so what you are saying is ignore child porn at the expense of dmca,
|
that is the biggest bullshit statement i have ever heard
are you actually trying to say that you could not tell the difference between milf content and kiddie porn.
You would have to be the single biggest moron if that was true.
The fact is there is tons of content that could be unlicienced but not related to kiddi porn.
Those milf models would have PEPIDA granted right to file a complaint against any company who released their info to a non governmental business like ccbill.
your proposed policy would absolutely violate their rights.
THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING
Quote:
|
and what i am saying is ethically and morally you should protect children as best you can. period end of story, what you are saying is its too costly for ccbill to hire one employee to curb child porn, sorry but many people disagree with you.
|
that is absolutely not what you are saying
you are trying to tie copyright infringement to kiddie porn to justify a draconion policy that would violate many foreign countries laws for things that could no way shape or form be kiddie porn (milf content)
If you were truely saying they should do the best they can to protect children you would be demanding that they pull every person dealing with DMCA complaints and put them on scanning the sites updates for kiddie porn.
You would be blasting your colleges who spend time and effort sending DMCA notices to the billing company instead of just focusing on the company who is actually hosting the content because they are taking people way from scanning the sites for kiddie porn.
Quote:
the 2 issues make it alot more fuzzy when put together , its much easier in mainstream where there arent issues with underage content.
You seem to be of the belief that its perfectly legal for me to sell copyright warner brothers movies until warner brother complains, not so.
|
but that not at all what we are talking about
we are talking about providing hosting services to a site that might be selling unauthorized copyright material when the safe harbor provision says that is legal.
If CCBILL actually owned the site in question then and only then could you claim you think i believe "that its perfectly legal for me to sell copyright warner brothers movies until warner brother comlains"
Until you produce proof that is exactly what is happening you are blantantly misrepresenting what i am saying to try and justify your bullshit proposed fix.