3 ms·

Character.ai says malicious\wrongful-takedown targets must pre-absolve enemy

___2-__---_--__ 4y ago
From beta.character.ai\tos: Even if you have evidence/knowledge of explicitly expressed intention to do you retaliatory or other maliciously-motivated harm, the only procedure provided for redress, rebuttal, review request submission requires you to pre-acknowledge your purported belief that "it was all a big mistake no doubt." Am I misreading? _____ Counter-Notice. If you believe that your User Content that was removed (or to which access was disabled) is not infringing, or that you have the authorization from the copyright owner, the copyright owner’s agent, or pursuant to the law, to upload and use the content in your User Content, you may send a written counter-notice containing the following information to the Copyright Agent: your physical or electronic signature; identification of the content that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the content appeared before it was removed or disabled; a statement that *you have a good faith belief that the content was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or a misidentification* of the content; and your name, address, telephone number, and email address, a statement that you consent to
- duskwuff 4y ago
  This is standard language describing a DMCA counternotification as prescribed by law. See 17 USC §512 (g)(3): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#g_3 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#g_3
villgax 4y ago
Very wrong of them to unabashedly make fake profiles of people without their consent to begin with. It is one thing to allow people to do whatever with a tool & another to market like that outright on the landing page
inetsee 4y ago
I found this part particularly interesting: "If you are a California resident, you waive California Civil Code Section 1542," Can they actually say that they are immune from the California Civil Code?
- hansvm 4y ago
  They can say whatever they want. It has the same weight as signs on the backs of trucks saying they aren't responsible for damage by rocks or disclaimers on your _receipts_ at parking garages disclaiming responsibility for damages. The practical effect is to spend basically $0 to reduce >$0 in people asserting their rights.

From beta.character.ai\tos: Even if you have evidence/knowledge of explicitly expressed intention to do you retaliatory or other maliciously-motivated harm, the only procedure provided for redress, rebuttal, review request submission requires you to pre-acknowledge your purported belief that "it was all a big mistake no doubt." Am I misreading? _____ Counter-Notice. If you believe that your User Content that was removed (or to which access was disabled) is not infringing, or that you have the authorization from the copyright owner, the copyright owner’s agent, or pursuant to the law, to upload and use the content in your User Content, you may send a written counter-notice containing the following information to the Copyright Agent: your physical or electronic signature; identification of the content that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the content appeared before it was removed or disabled; a statement that *you have a good faith belief that the content was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or a misidentification* of the content; and your name, address, telephone number, and email address, a statement that you consent to

duskwuff 4y ago
This is standard language describing a DMCA counternotification as prescribed by law. See 17 USC §512 (g)(3): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#g_3 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#g_3

villgax 4y ago

Very wrong of them to unabashedly make fake profiles of people without their consent to begin with. It is one thing to allow people to do whatever with a tool & another to market like that outright on the landing page

inetsee 4y ago

I found this part particularly interesting: "If you are a California resident, you waive California Civil Code Section 1542," Can they actually say that they are immune from the California Civil Code?

hansvm 4y ago
They can say whatever they want. It has the same weight as signs on the backs of trucks saying they aren't responsible for damage by rocks or disclaimers on your _receipts_ at parking garages disclaiming responsibility for damages. The practical effect is to spend basically $0 to reduce >$0 in people asserting their rights.