View Single Post
Old 02-26-2013, 08:51 AM   #16
JoeD
Guru
JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Chapman View Post
I heard that Moon+ adopted this solution, but were still challenged by LitRes, who actually wanted them to build in a black-list to block navigation to the flibusta site.
Check with your lawyers, but I highly doubt they have any grounds for requiring that be done, short of convincing a court to compel it, in which case you'd do it.

Web browsers do not have to include black lists to prevent their users visiting URLs that host pirated content and ISPS do not have to black list sites that link to piracy when requested by a copyright owner.

Now in the ISP case they will blacklist when a court order forces them to (e.g pirate bay), but that doesn't mean you have to or should block it without a court order. I would imagine most courts would take a different view on whether you're facilitating piracy by explicitly providing links to a pirate site or by allowing users to add any site they fancy which may or may not be a piracy site. You're not encouraging piracy in the latter case in my humble and not so legal opinion.

Above isn't legal advice though just opinion, need a lawyer for the former

Last edited by JoeD; 02-26-2013 at 08:57 AM.
JoeD is offline   Reply With Quote