DateDoc

Microsoft has managed to do what a roomful of secretive, three-letter government agencies have wanted to do for years: get the whistleblowing, government-document sharing site Cryptome shut down.

Microsoft dropped a DMCA notice alleging copyright infringement on Cryptome?s proprietor John Young on Tuesday after he posted a Microsoft surveillance compliance document that the company gives to law enforcement agents seeking information on Microsoft users. Young filed a counterclaim on Wednesday ? arguing he had a fair use to publishing the document, a full day before the Thursday deadline set by his hosting provider, Network Solutions.

Regardless, Cryptome was shut down by Network Solutions and its domain name locked on Wednesday ? shuttering a site that thumbed its nose at the government since 1996 ? posting thousands of documents that the feds would prefer never saw the light of day.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...soft-cryptome/

__________________

TheSenator

Microsoft is gonna close this thread down.

__________________
ISeekGirls.com since 2005

alias

Lameness.

__________________
https://porncorporation.com

TheDoc

Good stuff... that's what should happen when a company doesn't respond to the DMCA notice!

__________________

DateDoc

Did you not read that they responded to the DMCA and filed a fair use claim with the court?

__________________

michael.kickass

__________________

Agent 488

move to another host. big deal.

u-Bob

another reason to avoid netsol.

u-Bob

looks like wired is now hosting the .pdf

Iron Fist

The DNS is currently in LEGAL LOCK status and redirected to a blackhole. Moving hosts will do nothing to get your site up again.

A mirror of the site is already up: http://cryptomeorg.siteprotect.net/

__________________
i like waffles

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life

Good, and more mirrors will pop up. I agree with the fair use argument in this case.

Agent 488

http://cryptome.org/

up.

TheDoc

The guy didn't respond with proof that he owned or had permission to publish, copyrighted content, this isn't public information being exposed. He responded with some bullshit about fair use - that's not a reponse, it's an excuse to steal.. like a tube responding to you that they can rip your content because of fair use, that isn't going to fly in court and it doesn't fly with DMCA notices.

__________________

u-Bob

"Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test."

"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work; (The social usefulness of freely available information can weigh against the appropriateness of copyright for certain fixations. The Zapruder film of the assassination of President Kennedy, for example, was purchased and copyrighted by Time magazine. Yet their copyright was not upheld, in the name of the public interest.)
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."


This is nothing like a tube responding to you that they can rip your content because of fair use. Nothing at all. In case of content theft (illegal tubes) we are talking about commercial use (1), the intent to profit from other people's work (1), work that was produced with the intend to make a profit (2), work with no social usefulness (2) and use that reduces copyright the owner's potential to profit from his work (4).

In this case we are talking about the publication of a noncommercial document for noncommercial reasons. A publication that will help the public understand how their personal information will be used.

wired: "As Microsoft tells potential subpoenaees, “when you are looking for information on a specific incident like a photo posting or message posting, please request all group content and logs. We cannot retrieve single incident data.” The same holds for Spaces — if you are interested in a single picture, just request the entire thing."

TheDoc

End of the day, he didn't prove fair use before the deadline...he claimed it, but that doesn't stop anything.

And being that this is used for not for profit, clearly the document is educational, and used for law enforcement on top of it and the rules for it put in place by our Government, and it has trademarks on it, and "limited use of copyrighted material" was not used... it's all around not working in his favor.

__________________