6 ms·

>This implies that you are going to have to go to court No it doesn't, it means that if you get dragged to court because you got the email at 1AM and you were

by zaarn 8y ago

>This implies that you are going to have to go to court No it doesn't, it means that if you get dragged to court because you got the email at 1AM and you were asleep, then you're not guilty of anything. No judge will put up a fine for that.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> if you get dragged to court because you got the email at 1AM and you were asleep, then you're not guilty of anything Getting dragged to court is disruptive, unsettling and expensive.
- zaarn 8y ago
  And the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business by having you get into court for complaints without legal grounds.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business This all sounds quite lucrative for the lawyers and notaries. It remains disruptive, unsettling and expensive, not to mention unnecessary, for everyone else. Depending on which of the EU’s 28 member states’ courts one finds oneself dragged into, what you’re proposing could be years of distraction.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      >It remains disruptive, unsettling and expensive, not to mention unnecessary Nobody will do this, no sane legal department signs this off or approves of such behavior. Doing otherwise is a great way to incinerate their legal licenses. There are fines for behavior like that. The best outcome for the suing party of such a scenario is a 5 minute court room appearance in which the judge slaps you with a restraining order and closes the case. This has literally never been an escalating problem in european courtrooms to my experience because judges don't like that behavior and laws exist to prevent it.
      - smsm42 8y ago
        > There are fines for behavior like that. In theory, there are. In practice, the abuse of both copyright and offensive content notifications is rampant and almost never punished. You have to get to real hardcore crime on massive scale before judicial system starts noticing, and even then it can take years and a lot of effort to get it to do anything. In most cases, such abuse is completely unpunished or gets slap on the wrist.
        zaarn 8y ago
        Because the only system that sites implement is the DMCA, which is largely compatible with Notice&Takedown in the EU but N&T has much softer requirements and Art13 now requires human review and a founded response from the copyright holder.
  - smsm42 8y ago
    How often you hear about people being prosecuted for falsely flagging content as offensive online? How often you hear about prosecutions about false copyright infringement notifications? The latter happens only very rarely in cases of blatant abuse, usually coupled with massive fraud and other crimes (never happens to automatic systems big IP holders use, they just write it off as innocent error in 100% of the cases), the former happens never.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      That happens under the DMCA, prosecution under existing EU law and the new art11 and art13 wouldn't change much. Notice&Takedown does allow me to review any requests unlike the DMCA and Art13 requires human review in case of disputes. To my knowledge I can ignore entities that send me lots of useless Notices about third party content without legal consequence, I could even get a restraining order.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > I could even get a restraining order What? No you can’t. Is this entire thread disclaimed by your “sometimes I lie” line in your profile description?
  - karthikb 8y ago
    If there is only one possible outcome, then that outcome should be clearly encoded in the law. The whole purpose of the court system is to provide interpretation when a law is vague - intentionally or not.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      Remember that the law in europe tends to not function like the american law, including how courts work. The law is almost always vague and courts will have to interpret it.
      - karthikb 8y ago
        Right - and that's what would drive US based companies just to shut down access to EU versus trying to comply. The uncertainty may not be worth it for small companies just trying to gauge demand.
        zaarn 8y ago
        I shed tears for the growth-oriented silicon valley startups that won't be able to compete in the EU market, I really do.
  - will4274 8y ago
    > the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business by having you get into court for complaints without legal grounds. Dubious. The other lawyer will claim they believed you had read the complaint and therefore that they were acting in good faith, and will see no punishment at all.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      On what grounds would they be able to believe that I have read that complaint? Such things need proof in court.
      - will4274 8y ago
        Burden of proof goes the other way here. This is why (one of the reasons) bogus DMCA complaints are never prosecuted. You need to prove that they believed you hadn't read the complaint and knowingly went after you anyway. We only persecute people for using the legal system maliciously, not accidentally incorrectly.
  - bufferoverflow 8y ago
    Assuming you can even find another party. What would stop anyone from creating a bunch of accounts under TOR and reporting thousands of links per hour? Good luck dealing with that.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      Then I'll just ignore reports from Tor-based email domains? I don't think my email provider even accepts .onion for emails. Or I just ban Tor users from creating reports, I'm not forced to enable abuse, if they have an actual complaint they can use their real internet connection. End of story.
  - astura 8y ago
    Because the other party magically knows your sleep schedule? What if you're abroad or work third shift?
    - zaarn 8y ago
      They don't have to, they can simply wait a sufficient amount of time, usually a workday before they can enact further measures such as a C&D, which usually requires atleast 3 days before it can be considered received, after which you can take it to court. If you are on holiday at that time, the court will in almost all cases instruct the other party to wait until you return at which point you can respond to the C&D.
- JAlexoid 8y ago
  You'd think, right? But it's really not a big issue with a properly structured court and justice system. Most of EU has judges that are interested in a just resolution, not just being "an independent arbiter" of two researchers.
dmix 8y ago
> No it doesn't > No judge will put up a fine for that. You're contradicting yourself...you have to go to court to get charges dropped by a judge.
- zaarn 8y ago
  No I'm not. No sane lawyer will even recommend dragging you to court for that because the judge will like fine the suer and find the sued party not guilty. No legal department I know would stand behind such a decision, it would be absolutely stupid to drag anyone to court. And most likely the Judge would even have the suing party pay for your expenses and damages incurred by such charges.
  - dmix 8y ago
    They don't need to drag you to court. They fine you using the new EU law, then you refuse to pay and you essentially decide to go to court instead of paying. Even if the company decides to drop the complaint in response either way you have to put a significant amount of effort to get to that point. Merely because you got an email at night. This could happen 100x (or even thousands) for any mid-sized content platform. Most of these things are automated these days. Besides there's no guarantee the parties will automatically act rationally and drop the claims of infringement before threatening court, merely because you claim you were sleeping. And you specifically said a judge won't pursue it, but even that is a maybe.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      >Merely because you got an email at night. As mentioned multiple times, if they did this the judge would simply deny the entire fine and suit and they'd have to pay you damages and they'd likely receive a cease&desist order from the court. You must inform parties of violations and allow for adequate time to react to them. Sending an email is already a nono for legal notices as there is no guarantee that the other party even received the mail properly. The only way to properly and legally verifiably send them is to have a write-in mail which the receiver must sign with their signature before receiving. For everything else you might as well send money in an envelope ahead of time. This is not a mere fact this is established procedure. >Besides there's no guarantee the parties will automatically act rationally and drop the claims of infringement before threatening court, merely because you claim you were sleeping. That's not what I've been saying, I've been saying that the infringement still needs to be dealt with but you can obviously not react when you are asleep.
golem14 8y ago
You might still get a letter from some law office to tell you about the violation and a hefty bill for providing this service. I suggest familiarizing yourself with the concept of "abmahnung" in Germany. Quite a racket.
- zaarn 8y ago
  I'm quite familiar with this concept considering I have gotten a total of 2 Abmahnungen, one of which I paid because I did violate a rule and the other dropped after I threatened to take it to court. You'd be surprised how few of the senders are willing to actually go to court if the outcome is not 100% clear because any case could result in a ruling against them and shut down their business.
adynatos 8y ago
are you seriously arguing for having to interact with the justice system for not responding to an email within an hour as anything but totally wrong? jesus christ, where am i?
- zaarn 8y ago
  No I'm not and I think I've made that fairly clear in this thread.

by zaarn 8y ago

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> if you get dragged to court because you got the email at 1AM and you were asleep, then you're not guilty of anything Getting dragged to court is disruptive, unsettling and expensive.

zaarn 8y ago
And the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business by having you get into court for complaints without legal grounds.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business This all sounds quite lucrative for the lawyers and notaries. It remains disruptive, unsettling and expensive, not to mention unnecessary, for everyone else. Depending on which of the EU’s 28 member states’ courts one finds oneself dragged into, what you’re proposing could be years of distraction.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    >It remains disruptive, unsettling and expensive, not to mention unnecessary Nobody will do this, no sane legal department signs this off or approves of such behavior. Doing otherwise is a great way to incinerate their legal licenses. There are fines for behavior like that. The best outcome for the suing party of such a scenario is a 5 minute court room appearance in which the judge slaps you with a restraining order and closes the case. This has literally never been an escalating problem in european courtrooms to my experience because judges don't like that behavior and laws exist to prevent it.
    - smsm42 8y ago
      > There are fines for behavior like that. In theory, there are. In practice, the abuse of both copyright and offensive content notifications is rampant and almost never punished. You have to get to real hardcore crime on massive scale before judicial system starts noticing, and even then it can take years and a lot of effort to get it to do anything. In most cases, such abuse is completely unpunished or gets slap on the wrist.
      - zaarn 8y ago
        Because the only system that sites implement is the DMCA, which is largely compatible with Notice&Takedown in the EU but N&T has much softer requirements and Art13 now requires human review and a founded response from the copyright holder.
- smsm42 8y ago
  How often you hear about people being prosecuted for falsely flagging content as offensive online? How often you hear about prosecutions about false copyright infringement notifications? The latter happens only very rarely in cases of blatant abuse, usually coupled with massive fraud and other crimes (never happens to automatic systems big IP holders use, they just write it off as innocent error in 100% of the cases), the former happens never.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    That happens under the DMCA, prosecution under existing EU law and the new art11 and art13 wouldn't change much. Notice&Takedown does allow me to review any requests unlike the DMCA and Art13 requires human review in case of disputes. To my knowledge I can ignore entities that send me lots of useless Notices about third party content without legal consequence, I could even get a restraining order.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > I could even get a restraining order What? No you can’t. Is this entire thread disclaimed by your “sometimes I lie” line in your profile description?
- karthikb 8y ago
  If there is only one possible outcome, then that outcome should be clearly encoded in the law. The whole purpose of the court system is to provide interpretation when a law is vague - intentionally or not.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    Remember that the law in europe tends to not function like the american law, including how courts work. The law is almost always vague and courts will have to interpret it.
    - karthikb 8y ago
      Right - and that's what would drive US based companies just to shut down access to EU versus trying to comply. The uncertainty may not be worth it for small companies just trying to gauge demand.
      - zaarn 8y ago
        I shed tears for the growth-oriented silicon valley startups that won't be able to compete in the EU market, I really do.
- will4274 8y ago
  > the other party will be found guilty of disrupting your business by having you get into court for complaints without legal grounds. Dubious. The other lawyer will claim they believed you had read the complaint and therefore that they were acting in good faith, and will see no punishment at all.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    On what grounds would they be able to believe that I have read that complaint? Such things need proof in court.
    - will4274 8y ago
      Burden of proof goes the other way here. This is why (one of the reasons) bogus DMCA complaints are never prosecuted. You need to prove that they believed you hadn't read the complaint and knowingly went after you anyway. We only persecute people for using the legal system maliciously, not accidentally incorrectly.
- bufferoverflow 8y ago
  Assuming you can even find another party. What would stop anyone from creating a bunch of accounts under TOR and reporting thousands of links per hour? Good luck dealing with that.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    Then I'll just ignore reports from Tor-based email domains? I don't think my email provider even accepts .onion for emails. Or I just ban Tor users from creating reports, I'm not forced to enable abuse, if they have an actual complaint they can use their real internet connection. End of story.
- astura 8y ago
  Because the other party magically knows your sleep schedule? What if you're abroad or work third shift?
  - zaarn 8y ago
    They don't have to, they can simply wait a sufficient amount of time, usually a workday before they can enact further measures such as a C&D, which usually requires atleast 3 days before it can be considered received, after which you can take it to court. If you are on holiday at that time, the court will in almost all cases instruct the other party to wait until you return at which point you can respond to the C&D.
JAlexoid 8y ago
You'd think, right? But it's really not a big issue with a properly structured court and justice system. Most of EU has judges that are interested in a just resolution, not just being "an independent arbiter" of two researchers.

dmix 8y ago

> No it doesn't > No judge will put up a fine for that. You're contradicting yourself...you have to go to court to get charges dropped by a judge.

zaarn 8y ago
No I'm not. No sane lawyer will even recommend dragging you to court for that because the judge will like fine the suer and find the sued party not guilty. No legal department I know would stand behind such a decision, it would be absolutely stupid to drag anyone to court. And most likely the Judge would even have the suing party pay for your expenses and damages incurred by such charges.
- dmix 8y ago
  They don't need to drag you to court. They fine you using the new EU law, then you refuse to pay and you essentially decide to go to court instead of paying. Even if the company decides to drop the complaint in response either way you have to put a significant amount of effort to get to that point. Merely because you got an email at night. This could happen 100x (or even thousands) for any mid-sized content platform. Most of these things are automated these days. Besides there's no guarantee the parties will automatically act rationally and drop the claims of infringement before threatening court, merely because you claim you were sleeping. And you specifically said a judge won't pursue it, but even that is a maybe.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    >Merely because you got an email at night. As mentioned multiple times, if they did this the judge would simply deny the entire fine and suit and they'd have to pay you damages and they'd likely receive a cease&desist order from the court. You must inform parties of violations and allow for adequate time to react to them. Sending an email is already a nono for legal notices as there is no guarantee that the other party even received the mail properly. The only way to properly and legally verifiably send them is to have a write-in mail which the receiver must sign with their signature before receiving. For everything else you might as well send money in an envelope ahead of time. This is not a mere fact this is established procedure. >Besides there's no guarantee the parties will automatically act rationally and drop the claims of infringement before threatening court, merely because you claim you were sleeping. That's not what I've been saying, I've been saying that the infringement still needs to be dealt with but you can obviously not react when you are asleep.

golem14 8y ago

You might still get a letter from some law office to tell you about the violation and a hefty bill for providing this service. I suggest familiarizing yourself with the concept of "abmahnung" in Germany. Quite a racket.

zaarn 8y ago
I'm quite familiar with this concept considering I have gotten a total of 2 Abmahnungen, one of which I paid because I did violate a rule and the other dropped after I threatened to take it to court. You'd be surprised how few of the senders are willing to actually go to court if the outcome is not 100% clear because any case could result in a ruling against them and shut down their business.

adynatos 8y ago

are you seriously arguing for having to interact with the justice system for not responding to an email within an hour as anything but totally wrong? jesus christ, where am i?

zaarn 8y ago
No I'm not and I think I've made that fairly clear in this thread.