3 ms·

You probably should get really angry, cuz you seem to have a insider's view into Scribd's back end. If not, then you're just bloviating and making strawman argu

You probably should get really angry, cuz you seem to have a insider's view into Scribd's back end. If not, then you're just bloviating and making strawman arguments that don't really stand up.

RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
Hmm. Here, extracted from the comment above, is the basis of my point of view I submitted here to HN a link to a PDF which is copyrighted. That has been uploaded to scribd without acknowledgement. When I contacted scribd to ask them to take it down they said it was the responsibility of the copyright owner to make a formal request for takedown. Who ticked the box? I certainly didn't. Who checked that the person ticking the box had any right to do so? Scribd certainly didn't. From those facts I concluded: Scribd make no effort to ensure that copyright is not breached. There is no traceability. Their "efforts" are ineffective and insufficient. There was a breach of copyright, and certainly I wasn't contacted. I'm assuming the author wasn't contacted - scribd certainly don't appear to be proactive in contacting the author of everything uploaded. Someone has uploaded copyrighted material to scribd, and it's still there. Hence I conclude: If someone uploads material to scribd in breach of copyright, there are no sanctions, there is no culpability. Now, would you care to point out the strawman argument? I would be delighted to learn that a service I have hitherto thought of as the scum of the Earth are, in fact, noble and just. No, really, I would, and I'm just being selfish. Currently I get very angry thinking about their existence, and if I learned that I was wrong I'd be happier. Please. If you can't, then I suggest that when you say: ... you seem to have a insider's view into Scribd's back end. If not, then you're just bloviating and making strawman arguments that don't really stand up. then your logic is faulty.

You probably should get really angry, cuz you seem to have a insider's view into Scribd's back end. If not, then you're just bloviating and making strawman arguments that don't really stand up.

RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago

Hmm. Here, extracted from the comment above, is the basis of my point of view I submitted here to HN a link to a PDF which is copyrighted. That has been uploaded to scribd without acknowledgement. When I contacted scribd to ask them to take it down they said it was the responsibility of the copyright owner to make a formal request for takedown. Who ticked the box? I certainly didn't. Who checked that the person ticking the box had any right to do so? Scribd certainly didn't. From those facts I concluded: Scribd make no effort to ensure that copyright is not breached. There is no traceability. Their "efforts" are ineffective and insufficient. There was a breach of copyright, and certainly I wasn't contacted. I'm assuming the author wasn't contacted - scribd certainly don't appear to be proactive in contacting the author of everything uploaded. Someone has uploaded copyrighted material to scribd, and it's still there. Hence I conclude: If someone uploads material to scribd in breach of copyright, there are no sanctions, there is no culpability. Now, would you care to point out the strawman argument? I would be delighted to learn that a service I have hitherto thought of as the scum of the Earth are, in fact, noble and just. No, really, I would, and I'm just being selfish. Currently I get very angry thinking about their existence, and if I learned that I was wrong I'd be happier. Please. If you can't, then I suggest that when you say: ... you seem to have a insider's view into Scribd's back end. If not, then you're just bloviating and making strawman arguments that don't really stand up. then your logic is faulty.