View Single Post
Old 02-26-2013, 07:24 AM   #5
Jim Chapman
Addict
Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Jim Chapman ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 309
Karma: 2025434
Join Date: Oct 2009
Device: Lumia 950 Phone
Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul View Post
I'm not sure why you think the notices are spurious?
If you are linking to a site hosting copyright violations, then this is exactly what DMCA takedown notices are designed for.
(Moon+ was linking to such a site, the link has now been removed.)
Pirate sites are not 'competitors' deserving of protection.
Actually, as I understand it, DMCA takedown notices are intended for taking down the sites actually hosting violating content. I'm not hosting anything - rather, I am providing links to commonly used sites, and a general purpose mechanism (OPDS catalog compatibility) to let my users get at any book catalog on the internet. Honestly, I think that LitRes' tactics are a bit like going after Google, because "they provide a way that people could use to find the flibusta site" or going after Mozilla because "you can use the Firefox browser to look at stolen material".

And to teh603's point, a bit of googling does rather suggest that LitRes have, in the fairly recent past, themselves been on the wrong side of copyright law.
Jim Chapman is offline   Reply With Quote