4 ms·
$major_copyright_holder choosing not to make its content available outside $country is not the same as $major_copyright_holder choosing to take down $third_part
by mooism2 15y ago
$major_copyright_holder choosing not to make its content available outside $country is not the same as $major_copyright_holder choosing to take down $third_party_site.
(I live in Britain.)
- rbanffy 15y ago> $major_copyright_holder choosing to take down $third_party_site. Plus: without any judicial oversight or regard to national sovereignty.
- majani 15y agoThe copyright holders won't be taking down the rogue sites,they will be blocking them to US visitors. It's basically the same experience as the rest of the world gets with VEVO,Hulu and the like, except that US citizens won't get the polite 'Fuck you' message when they come through the door
- mooism2 15y agoWhen a copyright holder blocks a website from receiving revenue, that will often result in the website being taken down for business reasons (i.e. it will be down for the whole world, not just Americans. Does your site accept Paypal? Earn money from Google ads? Earn money from Amazon affiliate links? Not any more if Universal Music decides to put you out of business). Note that the website does not need to be infringing any of the copyright holder's copyrights for this to happen: there is no right to due process.