GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Kim Dot Com - This is why crazed narcissists always crash and burn in the end [VIDEO] (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1075436)

Gozarian 07-22-2012 06:47 AM

gideon - do the world a favor & please try some bath salts

gideongallery 07-22-2012 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWB (Post 19073868)
That may be the dumbest thing I've ever read.

If the post office was mostly used for criminal activities, they would shut it down in a second flat.

70 % of all files were only downloaded once or less

so your already have a majority of it being totally legit

Quote:

While Megaupload made efforts to curb abuse of its service, it recognized a competing obligation to its users who legitimately use[d] the service to store their own copies of copyrighted material. For example, a music file that was purchased or covered by fair use and uploaded by a user for the purpose of ?space shifting? (where media files stored on one device are accessed by the owner from another device) would look the same to Megaupload's automated processes as a music file to which the user had no legal right.

This obligation to its users who had a legal right to the files they stored presented an ongoing problem because the company was committed to ensuring that there was a proper and legitimate basis to require a data file to be removed. As a result, where a user was subject to a proper and specific take down notice for their unique link or URL, that user?s link to the file in question was taken down or broken.

The DMCA recognizes such complexities when it declares that Service providers (such as Megaupload) are not required to ?monitor its service or affirmatively seek out facts indicating infringing activity,? 17 U.S.C. § 512(m)(1).
of the remaining 30%

when you consider the differences between country laws (ie canada piracy tax etc)

maybe 1/2 of that is potentially infringing

and if they met the requirements of the safe harbor (something which many legal experts say they do given the wording about denying ACCESS (as an option). That goes to zero.

gideongallery 07-22-2012 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gozarian (Post 19073736)
Leave it to a blithering Indian from Kenya residing in Canada to tell Americans about US court system and stare decisis. You are like a dog chasing his tail.

Further if you knew a damn thing about Bieyanka Moore, you would know the entire thing was a money grab by her and her duplicitous mother. RK followed ALL applicable laws and reported the incidence to the FBI themselves.

gfy

and so did mega upload

they more than complied with dmca take downs


if your defending RK for following the letter of the law, that they know isn't good enough rather then doing a security check that would actually solve the problem (bondable employee)

Then the same principle applies to companies like mega upload who also fully comply with dmca.

slapass 07-22-2012 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biggy2 (Post 19073258)

What a fucking clown. Hey Kim Dotcom - you know why your site was incredibly popular, and it wasn't because people wanted to share legitimate content they owned.

This is it right here.

slapass 07-22-2012 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery (Post 19074078)
Then the same principle applies to companies like mega upload who also fully comply with dmca.

It would if they did. They did not. This was pretty provable with the evidence. It was a bad serve on the warrant, not a loack of proof of wrong doing.

gideongallery 07-22-2012 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 19074095)
It would if they did. They did not. This was pretty provable with the evidence. It was a bad serve on the warrant, not a lack of proof of wrong doing.

Reread the complaint the entire argument about not complying with the DMCA was because

1. stored the file once and created unique pointers for each user
2. they removed links (that were reported) to the content rather then removing the original file. (removed access not the content)


Many legal experts have come to the conclusion that is good enough given the fact that the DMCA gives the service provider the choice between removing the file and removing access

Quote:

if the person described in paragraph (1)(A) makes that material available online without the authorization of the copyright owner of the material, the service provider responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing upon notification of claimed infringement as described in subsection (c)(3), except that this subparagraph applies only if—
given the fact that the same exact file could have an infringing use (distribution) and a non infringing use (backup, space shifting) depending on if the unique url was shared or not shared it really was the only way they could do what they both prevent infringement and serve those people who were using the service legitimately.

Nautilus 07-22-2012 10:39 AM

"What about free speech" - yeah, exactly, what about it, where do we see it is either oppressed or restricted? What's wrong with the free speech? Fat fag is speaking freely, even while under investigation. He's posting at some of the most popular sites in the world, addresses people and is allowed to say basically anything he wants. He's even singing and addresses president himself, and quite probably his clip was already seen by president. So wtf is exactly wrong with the free speech? Bloodsucker is enjoying it to the most extreme, when he has something to say - whatever he says gets reported and reposted by thousands of media outlets including even big TV channels sometimes.

Whatever posting a cracked Windows of Photoshop and selling it for profit has to do with the free speach? Because selling of stolen shit is the only thing that the fat fag is accused of doing, and denied of doing. But when HE himself has something to say, which is pretty much different from stealing commercial products such as Windows of Photoshop - he's allowed to say anything, in any form, and basically he's allowed to address the whole world, and he's doing just that. So wtf is wrong with the free speech?

gideongallery 07-22-2012 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 19074095)
It would if they did. They did not. This was pretty provable with the evidence. It was a bad serve on the warrant, not a loack of proof of wrong doing.

btw if it was just a bad serve on a warrent and all the previously collected evidence proved they were guilty

all the government would have to do is drop the current charges, and re issue a new warrant


it a lot more than that.

from the jurisdictional issue that means they should even have a right to charge them

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...suit-you.shtml


to the 50,000 legitimate users who had their property taken

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...al-files.shtml

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-content.shtml

to the hundreds of artist who have come forward because they used mega upload for self promotion/payment.



to the use of civil liability of inducement as a justification for criminal prosecution even though there is no criminal liability for inducement.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...ismiss.shtml:(

to the illegal warrant

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-illegal.shtml

gideongallery 07-22-2012 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nautilus (Post 19074133)
"What about free speech" - yeah, exactly, what about it, where do we see it is either oppressed or restricted? What's wrong with the free speech? Fat fag is speaking freely, even while under investigation. He's posting at some of the most popular sites in the world, addresses people and is allowed to say basically anything he wants. He's even singing and addresses president himself, and quite probably his clip was already seen by president. So wtf is exactly wrong with the free speech? Bloodsucker is enjoying it to the most extreme, when he has something to say - whatever he says gets reported and reposted by thousands of media outlets including even big TV channels sometimes.

Whatever posting a cracked Windows of Photoshop and selling it for profit has to do with the free speach? Because selling of stolen shit is the only thing that the fat fag is accused of doing, and denied of doing. But when HE himself has something to say, which is pretty much different from stealing commercial products such as Windows of Photoshop - he's allowed to say anything, in any form, and basically he's allowed to address the whole world, and he's doing just that. So wtf is wrong with the free speech?


it not kim.com free speech that being censored it the small indie artist like dan bull who can't get their songs on the radio because their unsigned

and are now prevented from using mega upload as the radio alternative because it was shut down.

Jel 07-22-2012 11:12 AM

People still reply to this troll/idiot? You have way too much free fucking time on your hands...

Gozarian 07-22-2012 11:25 AM

aaron you are as big an ass clown as Kim. Ass lick him as he is obviously your hero.
Just stay the fuck out of my country

Gozarian 07-22-2012 11:27 AM

aaron fuck off - do the world a huge favor and crawl back under you rock and suck Kim's cock

Young 07-22-2012 11:30 AM

100 examples of GFY Logic

Which if you're paying attention is....

Pornhub (tube8, etc etc) and it's operators somehow ok (most of you praise them and comment on every thread they create on this board)

Megaupload and it's operator a scumbag

O.K. Got it.

DWB 07-22-2012 01:26 PM

........

campimp 07-22-2012 09:24 PM

catchy tune

xXXtesy10 07-22-2012 09:29 PM

More OWS shit...Occupy Weed Shop


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123