6 ms·

You are abusing the wrong law to do the right thing. You should be using privacy related laws for revenge porn, not copyright ones. Your actions prove OP's poin

You are abusing the wrong law to do the right thing. You should be using privacy related laws for revenge porn, not copyright ones. Your actions prove OP's point.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
Yeah but if DMCA takedowns have a more immediate effect (the revenge porn is removed ideally before it has a chance to spread further), they're the better option in this case. Could you do both? DMCA for a fast response, then a civil privacy related lawsuit for compensation etc? The civil suit can take ages.
- lja 3y ago
  Why pursue the civil case? Our clients just want it gone. They aren’t looking to drag it out.
lja 3y ago
There are no privacy laws that protect people from these kinds of uploads. We only have DMCA. Your vitriol only proves a lack of education around these topics.
- randunel 3y ago
  Which country in the world do your customers live in where there's no privacy laws regarding revenge porn? I'll look them up myself, since ad hominem seems to be your only argument. Inferring it's the USA from DMCAs, which states are lacking privacy laws, thus making revenge porn legal?
  - lja 3y ago
    Show me the privacy law that makes sites like motherless or 4chan archives take down images in the United States? Why would I do anything else when I’m not abusing DMCA.
jeroenhd 3y ago
I doubt revenge porn victims would pay $25 per month to send two free takedowns. This is clearly a service aimed at sex workers protecting their work. In that case, the DMCA certainly does apply. Flavouring their description with language like "non-consensual" seems dishonest, though.
- lja 3y ago
  There is value in the Takedown service but our major value is the facial recognition search. If you think that people won’t pay $25 to remove all the images and videos uploaded to porn across the internet with a few button clicks then you’ve clearly never had to worry about such things. Someone would have to spend $500k to scan and process the internet before they could come close to offering the coverage we could for $25. It’s incredible what kind of bubble HN lives in sometimes. EDIT: also, we limit it to two free DMCA’s to prevent abuse and we have a tutorial on our site on how to do your own DMCA for free. We’re not running an exploitative business, we’re helping people.

You are abusing the wrong law to do the right thing. You should be using privacy related laws for revenge porn, not copyright ones. Your actions prove OP's point.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

Yeah but if DMCA takedowns have a more immediate effect (the revenge porn is removed ideally before it has a chance to spread further), they're the better option in this case. Could you do both? DMCA for a fast response, then a civil privacy related lawsuit for compensation etc? The civil suit can take ages.

lja 3y ago
Why pursue the civil case? Our clients just want it gone. They aren’t looking to drag it out.

lja 3y ago

There are no privacy laws that protect people from these kinds of uploads. We only have DMCA. Your vitriol only proves a lack of education around these topics.

randunel 3y ago
Which country in the world do your customers live in where there's no privacy laws regarding revenge porn? I'll look them up myself, since ad hominem seems to be your only argument. Inferring it's the USA from DMCAs, which states are lacking privacy laws, thus making revenge porn legal?
- lja 3y ago
  Show me the privacy law that makes sites like motherless or 4chan archives take down images in the United States? Why would I do anything else when I’m not abusing DMCA.

jeroenhd 3y ago

I doubt revenge porn victims would pay $25 per month to send two free takedowns. This is clearly a service aimed at sex workers protecting their work. In that case, the DMCA certainly does apply. Flavouring their description with language like "non-consensual" seems dishonest, though.

lja 3y ago
There is value in the Takedown service but our major value is the facial recognition search. If you think that people won’t pay $25 to remove all the images and videos uploaded to porn across the internet with a few button clicks then you’ve clearly never had to worry about such things. Someone would have to spend $500k to scan and process the internet before they could come close to offering the coverage we could for $25. It’s incredible what kind of bubble HN lives in sometimes. EDIT: also, we limit it to two free DMCA’s to prevent abuse and we have a tutorial on our site on how to do your own DMCA for free. We’re not running an exploitative business, we’re helping people.