6 ms·

Who Has Your Back 2014: Protecting Your Data From Copyright/Trademark Bullies

162 points by joeyyang 12y ago

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
brianpgordon 12y ago
Is anyone else not seeing a bunch of the companies' logos? It looks like I get an HTTP header redirect to a 1x1 PNG: http://i.imgur.com/NFjIedl.png http://i.imgur.com/NFjIedl.png http://i.imgur.com/yRwP4q1.png http://i.imgur.com/yRwP4q1.png It can't be a transparent proxy interfering because it's an HTTPS connection...
- mkal_tsr 12y ago
  Chances are you have an extension/plugin to block social media scripts or the like. They're missing on my Chrome browser (Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect, HTTPS Everywhere, etc) but the vanilla Safari (no plugins) shows them fine.
  - thisisparker 12y ago
    This is correct. I uploaded the images and used names like facebook.png, which sometimes produces false positives on those extensions. I can confirm they're being served from eff.org and are not doing any tracking.
    - sarciszewski 12y ago
      Excellent.
- par0xyzm 12y ago
  This is ironic: The EFF's report about privacy protections offered by companies is published on a page with tracking beacons from websites with well-deserved terrible privacy reputations.
  - nacs 12y ago
    I'm using Ghostery and I'm not seeing any off-site tracking beacons on the eff.org page (they have a locally hosted PiWik analytics install but that's it).
  - schoen 12y ago
    If you look upthread, you can see these are probably false positives due to the image names of the corporate logos (see the note from 'thisisparker). The EFF site tries to be very careful about embeds and not serve scripts or images from third-party sites. For example, YouTube embeds there use youtube-nocookie.com with a click-to-load wrapper so that users have to affirmatively choose to interact with the YouTube servers. That's described at https://www.eff.org/pages/mytube-limit-privacy-risks-embedded-video https://www.eff.org/pages/mytube-limit-privacy-risks-embedde...
grayfox 12y ago
Anyone able to recommend namecheap? Been looking to ditch enom.
- johnpmayer 12y ago
  I've been with them since SOPA. Never had issues but I'm not power user.
- angkec 12y ago
  I'm using Namecheap and GoDaddy. Both works functional wise. So given the reputation Namecheap has and GoDaddy has not, I will go with Namecheap for the future.
  - dmix 12y ago
    Why not just transfer all the GoDaddy domains to Namecheap? I did that after numerous terrible GoDaddy experiences and couldn't be happier.
    - HNaTTY 12y ago
      Godaddy supports a lot of international TLDs that Namecheap does not.
      - scrollaway 12y ago
        I recommend Gandi (https://gandi.net https://gandi.net) for TLDs namecheap does not support. Both companies are extremely good, no-bullshit, against censorship, took a stand against SOPA, etc.
- tshtf 12y ago
  Namecheap support has been sketchy recently. I tried to add an IPv6 glue record through a ticket recently, and didn't get any response whatsoever after about a week. The only way I was able to get an answer was to use their live chat feature. Other than their support via tickets, they're a decent registrar.
- 12y ago
dang 12y ago
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=who+has+your+back#!/story/forever/0/who%20has%20your%20back https://hn.algolia.com/?q=who+has+your+back#!/story/forever/...
- joeyyang 12y ago
  The link from 5 months ago regards protection of data from government requests; today's report regards protection of speech from copyright and trademark bullies. Perhaps the title should be edited.
  - dang 12y ago
    Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!
Natsu 12y ago
Somehow I'm not surprised to see tumblr get 0/5.
- danellis 12y ago
  As someone who knows next to nothing about Tumblr, why?
  - bonjourmr 12y ago
    I'm also confused. Flickr, another Yahoo product has 4/5. Perhaps it's due to it being a more recent acquisition and the wheels are still in motion, or perhaps since there is so much sharing of copyrighted information it would be near impossible to maintain the cost of keeping up with these standards.
bsimpson 12y ago
Surprised GitHub isn't on the list.
r0h1n 12y ago
If I view the results as a trademark & copyright troll, I'd guess Tumblr is the one who's got my back. Conversely, perhaps Tumblr's most valued customers are trademark & copyright trolls, aka large media companies. [1] - http://www.adweek.com/news/television/viacom-tumblr-team-offer-co-branded-campaigns-156431 http://www.adweek.com/news/television/viacom-tumblr-team-off... [2] - http://www.thehubcomms.com/with-newly-appointed-director-of-media-tumblr-eyes-hollywood-partnerships/article/336220/ http://www.thehubcomms.com/with-newly-appointed-director-of-...
- rayiner 12y ago
  Ah yes, the trolls are the companies who actually create content, while the companies that trade in other peoples' content for profit are heroic do-gooders.
talon88 12y ago
Shouldn't we also care about who the copyright trolls are? I'm all for accountability from the provider side, but why not dig deeper into those that are issuing notices in bad faith, or that are being countered most often?

162 points by joeyyang 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Is anyone else not seeing a bunch of the companies' logos? It looks like I get an HTTP header redirect to a 1x1 PNG: http://i.imgur.com/NFjIedl.png http://i.imgur.com/NFjIedl.png http://i.imgur.com/yRwP4q1.png http://i.imgur.com/yRwP4q1.png It can't be a transparent proxy interfering because it's an HTTPS connection...

mkal_tsr 12y ago
Chances are you have an extension/plugin to block social media scripts or the like. They're missing on my Chrome browser (Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect, HTTPS Everywhere, etc) but the vanilla Safari (no plugins) shows them fine.
- thisisparker 12y ago
  This is correct. I uploaded the images and used names like facebook.png, which sometimes produces false positives on those extensions. I can confirm they're being served from eff.org and are not doing any tracking.
  - sarciszewski 12y ago
    Excellent.
par0xyzm 12y ago
This is ironic: The EFF's report about privacy protections offered by companies is published on a page with tracking beacons from websites with well-deserved terrible privacy reputations.
- nacs 12y ago
  I'm using Ghostery and I'm not seeing any off-site tracking beacons on the eff.org page (they have a locally hosted PiWik analytics install but that's it).
- schoen 12y ago
  If you look upthread, you can see these are probably false positives due to the image names of the corporate logos (see the note from 'thisisparker). The EFF site tries to be very careful about embeds and not serve scripts or images from third-party sites. For example, YouTube embeds there use youtube-nocookie.com with a click-to-load wrapper so that users have to affirmatively choose to interact with the YouTube servers. That's described at https://www.eff.org/pages/mytube-limit-privacy-risks-embedded-video https://www.eff.org/pages/mytube-limit-privacy-risks-embedde...

grayfox 12y ago

Anyone able to recommend namecheap? Been looking to ditch enom.

johnpmayer 12y ago
I've been with them since SOPA. Never had issues but I'm not power user.
angkec 12y ago
I'm using Namecheap and GoDaddy. Both works functional wise. So given the reputation Namecheap has and GoDaddy has not, I will go with Namecheap for the future.
- dmix 12y ago
  Why not just transfer all the GoDaddy domains to Namecheap? I did that after numerous terrible GoDaddy experiences and couldn't be happier.
  - HNaTTY 12y ago
    Godaddy supports a lot of international TLDs that Namecheap does not.
    - scrollaway 12y ago
      I recommend Gandi (https://gandi.net https://gandi.net) for TLDs namecheap does not support. Both companies are extremely good, no-bullshit, against censorship, took a stand against SOPA, etc.
tshtf 12y ago
Namecheap support has been sketchy recently. I tried to add an IPv6 glue record through a ticket recently, and didn't get any response whatsoever after about a week. The only way I was able to get an answer was to use their live chat feature. Other than their support via tickets, they're a decent registrar.
12y ago

dang 12y ago

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=who+has+your+back#!/story/forever/0/who%20has%20your%20back https://hn.algolia.com/?q=who+has+your+back#!/story/forever/...

joeyyang 12y ago
The link from 5 months ago regards protection of data from government requests; today's report regards protection of speech from copyright and trademark bullies. Perhaps the title should be edited.
- dang 12y ago
  Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!

Natsu 12y ago

Somehow I'm not surprised to see tumblr get 0/5.

danellis 12y ago
As someone who knows next to nothing about Tumblr, why?
- bonjourmr 12y ago
  I'm also confused. Flickr, another Yahoo product has 4/5. Perhaps it's due to it being a more recent acquisition and the wheels are still in motion, or perhaps since there is so much sharing of copyrighted information it would be near impossible to maintain the cost of keeping up with these standards.

bsimpson 12y ago

Surprised GitHub isn't on the list.

r0h1n 12y ago

If I view the results as a trademark & copyright troll, I'd guess Tumblr is the one who's got my back. Conversely, perhaps Tumblr's most valued customers are trademark & copyright trolls, aka large media companies. [1] - http://www.adweek.com/news/television/viacom-tumblr-team-offer-co-branded-campaigns-156431 http://www.adweek.com/news/television/viacom-tumblr-team-off... [2] - http://www.thehubcomms.com/with-newly-appointed-director-of-media-tumblr-eyes-hollywood-partnerships/article/336220/ http://www.thehubcomms.com/with-newly-appointed-director-of-...

rayiner 12y ago
Ah yes, the trolls are the companies who actually create content, while the companies that trade in other peoples' content for profit are heroic do-gooders.

talon88 12y ago

Shouldn't we also care about who the copyright trolls are? I'm all for accountability from the provider side, but why not dig deeper into those that are issuing notices in bad faith, or that are being countered most often?