4 ms·

I wonder what happens if a Medium user copies someone else's original content onto Medium and the post is uncontested by a DMCA request. If Medium or a subsidia

by grody 8y ago

I wonder what happens if a Medium user copies someone else's original content onto Medium and the post is uncontested by a DMCA request. If Medium or a subsidiary profit from reproducing that content, could the original creator sue, and for how much? Copyright is something I haven't taken the time to fully understand.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
elliekelly 8y ago
This is an important legal question that's currently being debated by many legislators around the world. In the U.S. there's a law frequently called "Section 230"[1] that protects online content publishers from being held legally responsible for user-created content published on their platform. It's the reason why Tinder isn't on the hook for fraud every time someone uses their service to catfish and why Backpage & Craigslist (until recently at least) weren't accessories to prostitution every time someone sold sexual services on their sites. Likewise, Section 230 acts as a "shield" to protect the platforms from copyright liability for content posted by their users. This is good. It allows platforms like Facebook, Reddit, Medium, and even Hacker News to exist without needing to constantly police everything being said on their platform. It allows users of those platforms to have free and open discussion. You've probably heard about "Article 13" and the "upload filter" in the European Union. Article 13 takes away the European equivalent of Section 230's "shield" that protects online platforms from copyright liability. And the United States has been slowly chipping away at Section 230's protections as well. Last year Trump signed "FOSTA" (sometimes called "SESTA") which "creates liability for third-party content on websites “that unlawfully promote or facilitate prostitution." I would encourage you to read why this legislation is a problem for anyone who enjoys the open internet as we currently know it.[2][3] [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 [2] https://www.eff.org/cases/woodhull-freedom-foundation-et-al-v-united-states https://www.eff.org/cases/woodhull-freedom-foundation-et-al-... [3] https://stopsesta.org/ https://stopsesta.org/

by grody 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

elliekelly 8y ago

This is an important legal question that's currently being debated by many legislators around the world. In the U.S. there's a law frequently called "Section 230"[1] that protects online content publishers from being held legally responsible for user-created content published on their platform. It's the reason why Tinder isn't on the hook for fraud every time someone uses their service to catfish and why Backpage & Craigslist (until recently at least) weren't accessories to prostitution every time someone sold sexual services on their sites. Likewise, Section 230 acts as a "shield" to protect the platforms from copyright liability for content posted by their users. This is good. It allows platforms like Facebook, Reddit, Medium, and even Hacker News to exist without needing to constantly police everything being said on their platform. It allows users of those platforms to have free and open discussion. You've probably heard about "Article 13" and the "upload filter" in the European Union. Article 13 takes away the European equivalent of Section 230's "shield" that protects online platforms from copyright liability. And the United States has been slowly chipping away at Section 230's protections as well. Last year Trump signed "FOSTA" (sometimes called "SESTA") which "creates liability for third-party content on websites “that unlawfully promote or facilitate prostitution." I would encourage you to read why this legislation is a problem for anyone who enjoys the open internet as we currently know it.[2][3] [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 [2] https://www.eff.org/cases/woodhull-freedom-foundation-et-al-v-united-states https://www.eff.org/cases/woodhull-freedom-foundation-et-al-... [3] https://stopsesta.org/ https://stopsesta.org/