Quote:
Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash
That's not quite how it works. DMCA takedown notices are issued for the illegally-posted copyrighted material (or the links to the material). The web site has to comply and remove the material or links.
The Megaupload case is a bit different than the scenario you describe, because part of the problem was allegedly not responding adequately to the takedown notices. There is a whole heckofalot more that was investigated as well, based on the list of charges against them.
You could not single-handedly get DropBox shut down with your hypothetical music blog.
|
Well, I know I could not shut down DropBox (or any other file sharing site) all by my lonesome; merely hypothetical question (and probably not a very good one).
But I wonder at what point they (the authorities) decide that a site's response to takedown notices is inadequate and take the site down. Are there any guidelines about this?
Not that I think Megaupload made a concerted effort to take down all of the copyrighted stuff they hosted.
And yes, there are lots of other charges: money-laundering, racketeering, etc. We shall see what they can make stick. I suspect a resolution will take some time. They have hired big-time lawyer Robert Bennett. Will be interesting to see what happens.
I still think the timing is a bit too much of a coincidence, given the proposed SOPA/PIPA bills. Which I am glad to say are apparently dead for the time being. I think they were poorly thought out, submitted by people who do not fully understand how the Internet works. I think there were other issues (privacy, possible censorship, etc.) that would have been involved.