3 ms·
No, that’s just how they’ve chosen to handle them to keep their unofficial “safe harbor” status since net neutrality is dead.
by chris37879 3y ago
No, that’s just how they’ve chosen to handle them to keep their unofficial “safe harbor” status since net neutrality is dead.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y agoSafe harbor is officially part of DMCA though where if you are notified of infringing content and take it down you aren't liable right? https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A... > DMCA Title II, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act ("OCILLA"), creates a safe harbor for online service providers (OSPs, including ISPs) against copyright infringement liability, provided they meet specific requirements.
- wtallis 3y agoThe notice [0] says "Kind of Work: Unspecified" and "Original URLs: No copyrighted URLs were submitted" so the safe harbor provisions pertaining to copyright infringement aren't really applicable here. [0] https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34149383 https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34149383
- kelnos 3y agoSafe harbor has nothing to do with net neutrality. Not complying with DMCA takedown notices would leave them open to legal liability, which I think is fair for them not to want to do.