3 ms·

ISPs are only required to forward the DMCA notice to you (unless they suck and just want to drop you). The only reason the DMCA notices took down Napster et al.

ISPs are only required to forward the DMCA notice to you (unless they suck and just want to drop you). The only reason the DMCA notices took down Napster et al. is because the requests are valid. You could build Content ID for the real internet but it would only as much as you can intimidate each individual creator/site operator. They are free to at least decide to defend themselves if they wanted to. Under the Youtube ContentID that really isn't an option. Plus non-US creators could care a lot less since enforcing DMCA/copyright internationally is going to be even more costly.

judge2020 5y ago
Absent a VPN, ISPs have teamed up (as in, are often ran by the same media giants sending the request) to give customers a 3/6-strike policy for DMCA takedowns. So people self-hosting could eventually mean no internet for them (at least, for as long as the internet isn't considered a utility). https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130227/14231422143/comcast-we-wont-terminate-your-account-under-six-strikes-well-just-block-every-single-website.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130227/14231422143/comca...
jrockway 5y ago
It depends on what the ISP wants to do, right? They could forward the request along, or they could say "whoaaaa we don't want this customer" and turn you off with no appeal process. They have an obligation to forward the notice to the end user, but the end user doesn't have the right to have Internet access while the dispute process proceeds. That is a legal program, and it is certainly worth considering whether or not business Internet should be a "right" or not. (And I guess that as the Internet market heats up and competitors become available, a ToS like "we won't turn you off just because you get a DMCA notice" could be quite appealing.)

3 ms·

ISPs are only required to forward the DMCA notice to you (unless they suck and just want to drop you). The only reason the DMCA notices took down Napster et al.

by KingMachiavelli 5y ago

judge2020 5y ago
Absent a VPN, ISPs have teamed up (as in, are often ran by the same media giants sending the request) to give customers a 3/6-strike policy for DMCA takedowns. So people self-hosting could eventually mean no internet for them (at least, for as long as the internet isn't considered a utility). https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130227/14231422143/comcast-we-wont-terminate-your-account-under-six-strikes-well-just-block-every-single-website.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130227/14231422143/comca...
jrockway 5y ago
It depends on what the ISP wants to do, right? They could forward the request along, or they could say "whoaaaa we don't want this customer" and turn you off with no appeal process. They have an obligation to forward the notice to the end user, but the end user doesn't have the right to have Internet access while the dispute process proceeds. That is a legal program, and it is certainly worth considering whether or not business Internet should be a "right" or not. (And I guess that as the Internet market heats up and competitors become available, a ToS like "we won't turn you off just because you get a DMCA notice" could be quite appealing.)