Pirate sites without Valid contact information
 

Does a site fall under the safe harbour act or whatever it's called if they don't have valid contact information to send dmca notices to? The emails just bounce back undelivered.

Since oron bought pornbb.org - I see that they dont have a valid email to contact pornbb.org with and when you send the dmca letters to where the content is hosted (oron), they just remove the files and replace the links in the posts.

where is oron out of? israel?

Off the top of my head, I do not believe 'valid contact information' is a part of the Safe Harbor.

I believe to claim Safe Harbor, you must be Schultz from, "Hogan's Hereos" when it comes to knowing what your clients are doing. You do not actively police, review, or moderate their uploads.

:2 cents:

"I know no-ting!"

Not sure where they are based out of but im now under the understanding that this doesn't apply to people outside US, so how come tube sites still follow this when they aren't located in the US?

Is there any steps that can be taken to remove content from pornbb.org/oron? Since they are working together now? Because dmca takedown notices?

Im pretty sure oron is in the US.

Preemptive disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and so obviously the text below should not be considered "legal advice."

For solid legal advice on this subject, you must retain an attorney who is highly familiar with this area of law. (Just any old attorney who has passed the bar exam and hung a sign will not do.... trust me on that much.)

Having said that... the requirements for Safe Harbor with respect to how/where you are required to identify your 'designated agent' fall under § 512(c).

Here's the pertinent portion of the statutory language:

That's just one part of what is required of ISPs/OSPs under § 512, though; the full requirements for receiving safe harbor under DMCA are actually quite a bit more complicated than most people realize -- including, IME, many people who are relying heavily on the protection of that safe harbor, should the shit ever hit their particular fan.... ;-)

The good news for ISPs/OSPs is that your compliance with DMCA doesn't matter much until or unless someone takes you to court, and you find yourself in the position of having to litigate the question of whether your site/service is compliant with the Act.

The bad news for ISPs/OSPs is that if you are taken to court for alleged copyright violation, and you haven't done the basic, "black letter law" things you need to do under DMCA in order to receive the safe harbor protection..... well, you are going to find yourself in a mighty disadvantaged position when the courtroom action kicks up.

There are non-DMCA defenses available to ISPs/OSPs as well, of course, but those defenses are a whole lot trickier to rely on than is the safe harbor protection.

As for why many non-U.S.sites/services endeavor to comply with DMCA even though they aren't located in the U.S. -- a U.S. court can (and often will) assert jurisdiction over foreign entities, if and when that entity has a "U.S. nexus" to it.

In other words, if you're a foreign website operator, but you do business within the U.S. market, accept payments from American consumers, host your sites on servers in the U.S., and/or other things along those lines, you can be held to account in a U.S. court.

BTW -- it's also worth noting that (in theory at least), the FBI can assert similar "extraterritorial jurisdiction" with respect to 2257, if there's a similar sort of U.S. nexus with respect to a foreign 'producer.'

So far as I'm aware, the FBI has never conducted an inspection of a non-U.S. producer/records-holder, but when I interviewed Chuck Joyner (the head of the FBI's 2257 inspection team) a few years back, he was pretty clear about the fact that the FBI is legally empowered to conduct such an inspection, if and when the circumstances merit it.

Right. As I am not Barefootsies esquire. :winkwink:

When we see anything 'legal' come in. I simply hand it over to the lawyer. We had a grand jury subpoena last month for some IP/website that was doing some bad shit. The paperwork comes in, you had it over to the attorney, they tell you what you need to do, the end. Most of the time it's formalities to comply with what they are asking for. But I am not a lawyer, nor claim to be.

However, I can't say I have seen 'contact information' come up in this context or on the forums before, hence my 'best guess'. Normally with a DMCA, you have to follow a specific format including the swearing affirmation, listing what is yours, blah blah blah. That is submitted, they forward to legal, they confirm, and then it's taken down. Clients can also file a counter DMCA, but I have yet to see that happen.

All of this being said, I will yield my time on the floor to Quentin on the subject.

The FBI needs to not investigate for piracy they need to investigation 2257 on pirate sites.

Its a win for the government in getting 2257 violators and protects content.

WIN/WIN.

Oh well. Thats just to easy and makes to much sense for our "Civilized Society".

If they do not have 2257 info they can be prosecuted easily, why bother going after them for piracy when you can get them for violating 2257?

Call the FBI:)

i would bet that has a lot to do with the fact most adult sites don't notify the uploader about the complaint at all.

unlike the mainstream counterparts who do

i do not think the pornbb kid owner cares what anyone here thinks :1orglaugh

http://ru-ru.facebook.com/people/Art...00000005258870