Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
CrkMStanz,
1) PROTECT IP says sites following DMCA do not fall under sites that could be seized according to PROTECT IP. So I do not think you actually mean replacing DMCA with PROTECT IP would solve your issue.
|
yes, we need to get away from the 'content owner must
find the infringing sites and politely
ask if they would kindly take it down' way of doing things, to replace DMCA the new laws would have to absorb it as a way of tracking repeat offenders - submit the DMCA to not only the site but to some kind of registry to track repeat offenders.
we both know that existing 'infringing' sites already monitor their 'user uploads' for some stuff (CP, banned studios, beastiality, or ANYTHING that doesn't fit the motif of their site) - there should be no problem in requiring all 'upload sites' to expand that list at the request of any content owner / copyright holder
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
2) You are also basically saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that you want all sites that allow user submitted content to be shut down and made illegal? Meaning, facebook needs to stop allowing user uploaded items, all the image hosts out there that let you manage your photos and share them need to be closed, all of flickr.com basically is illegal, twitter can not be allowed to let people link to content...
|
Don't pull the giddyboy twist on words here - you are smarter than that. It isn't black or white. I am saying they need to be responsible for what they make available - user submitted content is supposed to be content that the owner made or owns, content they have a right to post for the world - If Matt and Trey want their full episodes of South Park up onYouTube, then they can post it, postings by anyone other than them (or the studio, or whoever actually owns the right to post) should have some real ramifications, to both the uploaders, and to the site that allows it.
simply put - make your own dam videos and post them on YouTube (or anywhere else)
If you absolutly just have to start a "discussion" on someone elses work, post the trailer/promo - or better yet, post a video of YOU, clearly using your right to Free Speech, actually talking about the content - and link to the content OWNERS site for the full version - thats some real 'Free Speech' in action right there
its not the 'user submitted' sites that need to be made 'illegal', its the allowance of the current practices that needs to be addressed - and SOMEONE has to be held accountable (the submitter) and SOMEONE has to be responsible (Site Owners).
pawn shop owners are responsible for what comes in to their stores - in fact, in some way every business is responsible for what they take in and in turn offer to the public
- diamonds from banned countries
- automotive parts obtained from chop shops
- food from reputable sources
- news services and their sources
I could go on and on with this list... there is NO reason that 'user submitted' sites shouldn't be held accountable for their sources of 'input'
The fix is to get to a place where digital is treated the same as physical in the eyes of the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
3) You also seem to want the definition of "hosting service" to be changed. But I am not sure to what, how do you define what is a hosting service and what is not? Since you clearly do not want a HOST liable for what its users upload, right? IE, you are a user of your host, your host is thus a user submitted content service. And if you upload illegal content, your host would be liable without DMCA. How do you fix that?
|
Didn't think I went there but, yes... At some point in the chain it would become apparent that some 'Hosts' are dealing in a large volume of infringing sites, and just as the individual sites should be responsible for their own 'uploaders', Hosts should be responsible for their individual sites, and ISPs should be responsible for their individual hosts. If you continue to allow Infringement on the site/host you own, you should be accountable, you should risk losing your site, or having your hosting services shut down.
I am not saying 'MONITOR EVERYTHING' - I am saying that when it becomes apparent there needs to be repercussions - right now there are none - everyone is free to carry on infringing and only take something down if they are 'caught' - thats all well and good but the next step is to tally how many times they are caught, and
then take appropriate action.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
And please, give me answers to 2) and 3) which are not short ones, actually define HOW you want to fix it. Suggest how to define each...
|
it is, of course too complex to answer without a gideon style novel
NONE of this deprives anyone of their 'Free Speech' - it would still allow you to
.