3 ms·

They are not subject to DMCA (not being inside the USA). However, even though they are not subject, they are still "DMCA compliant" because they do not store an

They are not subject to DMCA (not being inside the USA). However, even though they are not subject, they are still "DMCA compliant" because they do not store any data that could infringe upon copyrights, they only store links to that data (or links to ways of accessing). I like the point @redthrowaway made. "I don't serve food to the public out of my office. Thus, I am trivially in compliance with food safety laws." In the same way, TPB are compliant with the DMCA (and also compliant with food safety laws). Sure, it might seem like a silly defense, but it's true and it works.

ikeboy 10y ago
>they do not store any data that could infringe upon copyrights, they only store links to that data This argument has largely not held up in court. See Isohunt. I've asked elsewhere in this thread for a single example of this argument (for a torrent site) working in US courts, and nobody had one. Do you know of any?
- e12e 10y ago
  As far as I know the isohunt case was settled, so no legal presendent was set? https://torrentfreak.com/isohunt-shuts-down-after-110-million-settlement-with-the-mpaa-131017/ https://torrentfreak.com/isohunt-shuts-down-after-110-millio... There's some more detail in the Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IsoHunt#Legal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IsoHunt#Legal As far as I know there are two issues: 1) whatever the technical details, if it can be shown that the intent is overwhelmingly to fascilitate unlicensed copying - then any search engine could be held to be illegal. b) These other cases are old; there are technical differences between indexing magnet links and storing torrent files, not to mention running torrent trackers. While intent is still important, I'm not sure the technical differences don't matter now. As far as I know linking to illegal content is (mostly) legal.
  - ikeboy 10y ago
    Isohunt lost in court, and settled while appealing. >While intent is still important, I'm not sure the technical differences don't matter now. I'm not sure of this either, but the "DMCA doesn't affect hashes" argument hasn't been tested, and it's sufficiently murky that I don't think it can be pre-judged with confidence.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  > I've asked elsewhere in this thread for a single example of this argument (for a torrent site) working in US courts, and nobody had one. Do you know of any? When The Pirate Bay falls under US jurisdiction, your request will matter.

ikeboy 10y ago

>they do not store any data that could infringe upon copyrights, they only store links to that data This argument has largely not held up in court. See Isohunt. I've asked elsewhere in this thread for a single example of this argument (for a torrent site) working in US courts, and nobody had one. Do you know of any?

e12e 10y ago
As far as I know the isohunt case was settled, so no legal presendent was set? https://torrentfreak.com/isohunt-shuts-down-after-110-million-settlement-with-the-mpaa-131017/ https://torrentfreak.com/isohunt-shuts-down-after-110-millio... There's some more detail in the Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IsoHunt#Legal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IsoHunt#Legal As far as I know there are two issues: 1) whatever the technical details, if it can be shown that the intent is overwhelmingly to fascilitate unlicensed copying - then any search engine could be held to be illegal. b) These other cases are old; there are technical differences between indexing magnet links and storing torrent files, not to mention running torrent trackers. While intent is still important, I'm not sure the technical differences don't matter now. As far as I know linking to illegal content is (mostly) legal.
- ikeboy 10y ago
  Isohunt lost in court, and settled while appealing. >While intent is still important, I'm not sure the technical differences don't matter now. I'm not sure of this either, but the "DMCA doesn't affect hashes" argument hasn't been tested, and it's sufficiently murky that I don't think it can be pre-judged with confidence.
toomuchtodo 10y ago
> I've asked elsewhere in this thread for a single example of this argument (for a torrent site) working in US courts, and nobody had one. Do you know of any? When The Pirate Bay falls under US jurisdiction, your request will matter.