Comment Re:Here we go again. (Score 1) 278
If you hold tech companies legally responsible for the content their users produce, they will *shut down* the ability for those users to produce content. Really itâ(TM)s that simple.
Only the big rich companies will be able to able to host user-generated content. If you have a poor opinion of a tech giant, just imagine if you removed the possibility of competing with it... Note that Section 230 also protects you, the individual. Ever forwarded an email that might have had Copyrighted content?
Comment Re:Read about the case. (Score 4, Insightful) 89
Comment Re:regardless of politics (Score 1) 169
Parler was banned because they violated AWS's Terms-of-Service.
It wasn't even banned; it's account was simply suspended until it could resolve the underlying issue, which was a lack of moderation when it came to incitements to violence. This advocacy of harm is against AWS's ToS.
Comment Re:regardless of politics (Score 1) 169
Comment It's only fair use to parody the material itself (Score 2) 60
Comment Re: Welcome back to 1995! (Score 1) 140
Comment Welcome back to 1995! (Score 0) 140
Windows 95 would crash after 49.7 days (if it managed to not crash before that).
Comment Biased hyperboly, or am I missing something? (Score 1) 76
Comment Misplacing the blame (Score 1) 90
Thanks to Google's indifference, the pirates can continue to sell ebooks no matter how many times copyright holders might complain. If Google takes a pirated ebook down in response to a DMCA notice, the pirates simply upload another copy of the same title.
If you pirates to stop distributing your works, you need to go after the pirates. Google is not your mommy. It won't kiss you and make everything all right.
DMCA requires platforms to take down very specifically identified infringements. The same work uploaded by another user is not necessarily an infringement, so another notification is required on behalf of the rights owner. Not policing for infringement is not a sign of indifference on the behalf of the platform. Policing is not required of the platform because it is impossible for it to do so.
Comment Re:Google reminds me of MS in the late '90s (Score 1) 90
Comment Re:Algorithms Kill (Score 1) 343
Comment Re:Is that fraud? (Score 1) 250
Dropbox, as the service provider, does NOT have the right to say what is or is not copyrighted content
Of course they can. It's not libel, slander or otherwise illegal speech.
If you meant they don't have the right to take down content, that's not right either. The DMCA safe harbours make clear that a site isn't responsible for the actions of 3rd parties, but that doesn't prevent sites from policing their users if they want to, and it doesn't prevent sites from taking down any content they want to from their own sites.
What they can't do is send DMCA takedown requests for content to which they down own the rights. If they did this here, they are in the wrong. Unfortunately, very few face the consequences of sending false DMCA takedown requests.