5 ms·
You don't blacklist based on content, but on the hashes of the content, which the nodes have to know. At one point or another, the decryption key has to be shar
by hobofan 9y ago
You don't blacklist based on content, but on the hashes of the content, which the nodes have to know. At one point or another, the decryption key has to be shared for the encrypted content to be usable for anyone, and if the copyright holders get a hold of that key, they can prove a violation and blacklist the hash of the content.
- 1024core 9y agoYou do realize though that changing just 1 bit can change the entire hash? What's to prevent people from appending a random bit or two, and getting an entirely new, unblocked, hash?
- slededit 9y agoResponding to specific take down requests is enough to activate the safe harbor provisions in the DMCA. Legally they don't have to do anything else.
- hobofan 9y agoI was just explaining the general concept. I don't claim to have in depth knowledge on the subject. I think blocking a hash can already be a victory, since it basically makes all the metadata that was associated with the hash useless and forces reseeding under a new hash and publicizing that hash. As long as you make it inconvenient enough, very few people will bother, which is the best the copyright holders can hope for. Reseeding might be pretty easy though in IPFS since there is a block layer below the object layer, and I guess you can't really block block-hashes.
- Keeeeeeeks 9y agoGreat point; this happens a lot with YouTube videos, and would definitely get worse with other sorts of media