Quote:
Originally Posted by VGeorgie
As usual, you're tripping over your own feet to make your point, and stumbling all the way. Here are the facts.
1. These file servers, no matter where they are located, invoke the DMCA for its safe harbor provision, as a means to seek immunity from infringement claims, including that from EU and other laws that provide similar safe harbor provisions.
(You consistently misstate that because DMCA is a US law those not in the United States are immune, but you conveniently forget the EU and many other countries have their own versions of it, some of which are based directly on the wording of the DMCA.)
|
what exactly about the statement
Quote:
mininova complied with DCMa rather then demand that copyright holders obey their countries laws and they actually lost the safe harbor protection that their countries laws would have provided.
obeying a DCMA request for a non US host is actually plain stupid given that ruling.
|
do you not understand
Quote:
2. Regardless of the DMCA, the file servers are in the business to make money from converting surfers to paid users (i.e. "direct financial benefit"), and reward uploaders by paying them a percentage fee based on number of downloads. This is, in fact, against the DMCA and EU laws, and no safe harbor is provided for it in any case.
3. Once a file server agrees to be bound by the DMCA, regardless of jurisdiction, and regardless of whether it actually enjoys safe harbor, it must then comply with all requirements of the DMCA to order to anticipate its protection. The fact that they refuse to comply strips them of any legal defense, in any territory or jurisdiction.
|
again 100% wrong
obeying the DMCA takedown request for a non US hosting operation doesn't give you any safe harbor protection for non US operations.
and if you "compliance" misses something that your own countries laws requires will actually cost you the protection of your own country
google the mininova court case if you don't believe me. That exactly why they got ass raped.
this "shady" process is a direct result of that ruling so you can blame your copyright monopoly buddies in the mpaa for all the extra work.