Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Photographer should say "Go ahead" (Score 1) 667

The DMCA doesn't restrict speech. Your contract with your ISP that you enter in gives the ISP the right to take it down. You've waived your right by signing your contract (in the same that NDAs work). The gov't is not forcing the ISP to take it down, so there is no free speech issue here.

Comment Re:Photographer should say "Go ahead" (Score 1) 667

The rest of the DMCA is absolute rubbish, but not the take down provision.

The takedown doesn't provide for any punishment whatsoever. An ISP is free to ignore the takedown notice, but they lose their safe haven against liability if they ignore it and it turns out to be illegal. You are free to choose an ISP that won't preemptively drop your site. She happened to choose an ISP that handles take downs in the manner illustrated in the article.

Candice Schwager stupidly choose an ISP that shuts down sites and then she stupidly took the fight to the internet. epic fail.

Comment Re:don't get fickle now (Score 1) 667

bq. Schwager had no idea who it belonged to or the license behind it.

So the only course of action was to use it?? How entitled sounding is you comment? A normal person would see that since you can't find the owner of the copyright don't fucking use it.

The takedown provision is the absolutely only good thing about the DMCA. I still hate the DMCA, but the take down provisions aren't that bad.

Comment Re:Photographer should say "Go ahead" (Score 1) 667

Contacting people on the internet NEVER works. It is a HUGE waste of time. The DMCA move is the proper way to do it. Be pissed at the ISPs if you want to be mad at someone. Or better yet the infringing person. It's not like he was suing the infringing person over using it. Get some perspective.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with opportunity is that it always comes disguised as hard work. -- Herbert V. Prochnow