How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down • Hacker News Board

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#21

Post by leeoniya » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:13 AM UTC

kijin wrote: post #11

lacker wrote: post #6

It isn’t really fair to pick on Linode, all US hosting providers work the same way. When someone files a DMCA claim, if you want to keep the content up you need your lawyer to file a counterclaim. Hosting providers are then allowed to leave it up, and you can fight about it in court. It sounds from this article like the newspaper didn’t have a lawyer, or at least not a lawyer familiar with American law. That sucks bu…

This is a common misconception. You can't use a counter-claim to keep your content up. You can only use one to have your content reinstated after it has been removed. https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim

we've gone through this with linode. they give you exactly 96 hours to remove the content and then you can go through the dispute process. it took about 2 weeks to work things out.

we had used some images from an mfg's pdf installation manual on a page that was reselling that mfg's own products which we were buying from their offical distributor - the only way to get the product. talk about absurd.

some of the media that they claimed was theirs was in fact our own original graphics/images. it didn't matter, we had to remove everything that was in their overly broad claim.

the DMCA is no joke, but is also a big fucking joke. it's trivial to completely destroy someone's business by simply making fraudulent claims (it's guilty until proven innocent). and it's almost impossible to prove that the claim was made in bad faith rather than simply in error. these claims are usually made by some contracted third party that flags everything that smells off. it's the new patent trolling.

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#22

Post by dom_hutton » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:13 AM UTC

ISL wrote: post #20

Sendotsh wrote: post #18

> please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html The title of this submission should be "CENSORED: How the M&G got taken down". Linode aren't the bad guys here and the title is flat-out misleading.

It is unclear that Linode is acting like a good guy here.

Either way that is opinion, best to leave the reader to make their own mind up.

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#23

Post by ISL » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:15 AM UTC

dom_hutton wrote: post #22

ISL wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is unclear that Linode is acting like a good guy here.

Either way that is opinion, best to leave the reader to make their own mind up.

Agreed.

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#24

Post by peter_retief » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:21 AM UTC

M&G do valuable work in exposing corruption and really need to be supported. It is hardly Linodes fault that they got manipulated but there really needs to be better oversight to protect, already struggling, investigative journalism

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#25

Post by rosser » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:22 AM UTC

leeoniya wrote: post #21

kijin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misconception. You can't use a counter-claim to keep your content up. You can only use one to have your content reinstated after it has been removed. https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim

we've gone through this with linode. they give you exactly 96 hours to remove the content and then you can go through the dispute process. it took about 2 weeks to work things out. we had used some images from an mfg's pdf installation manual on a page that was reselling that mfg's own products which we were buying from their offical distributor - the only way to get the product. talk about absurd. some of the media…

We get DMCA claims all the time — most often from our customers' own counsel. Even so, the explicit, as automated as can be policy is to pull the content, and let the lawyers sort it out amongst themselves.

It is very much a joke, and not a joke.

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#26

Post by elygre » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:25 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #4

AstralStorm wrote: post #2

Did they file a counter suit for plagiarism? What happens when DMCA notice meets another one? Welcome to Bad Law.

If you’re not in the US, avoid US technology providers subject to US law. This publication would likely be better suited using a provider out of Europe.

How does this work with European instances of large providers, e.g. the Ireland versions of Azure and Amazon?

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#27

Post by Moru » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:26 AM UTC

leeoniya wrote: post #21

kijin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misconception. You can't use a counter-claim to keep your content up. You can only use one to have your content reinstated after it has been removed. https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim

we've gone through this with linode. they give you exactly 96 hours to remove the content and then you can go through the dispute process. it took about 2 weeks to work things out. we had used some images from an mfg's pdf installation manual on a page that was reselling that mfg's own products which we were buying from their offical distributor - the only way to get the product. talk about absurd. some of the media…

Solution: Host your stuff outside of country, don't use cloudflare or other US based services

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#28

Post by nabla9 » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:28 AM UTC

The economics of DMCA claims is similar to spam marketing. The cost is disproportionately in the receiving end. The cost of making claims is close to zero.

You can fix this by adding small cost. If counterclaim is filed and complaint maker is not moving the case forward, they should pay something. Even small sum like $1000 per dropped claim would likely stop this madness.

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#29

Post by Cogito » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:30 AM UTC

illuminati1911 wrote: post #19

The DMCA is truly a steaming pile of shit. Nintendo and other companies are also abusing it to take down fair use videos by individuals on YouTube.

YouTube take downs are usually done without DMCA, right?

Are you saying that the DMCA is explicitly being invoked by Nintendo and others, or are you talking more generally and including, for example, YouTube's Content ID system?

Re: How the “Mail & Guardian” got taken down

#30

Post by leeoniya » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:31 AM UTC

Moru wrote: post #27

leeoniya wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we've gone through this with linode. they give you exactly 96 hours to remove the content and then you can go through the dispute process. it took about 2 weeks to work things out. we had used some images from an mfg's pdf installation manual on a page that was reselling that mfg's own products which we were buying from their offical distributor - the only way to get the product. talk about absurd. some of the media…

Solution: Host your stuff outside of country, don't use cloudflare or other US based services

sorry, no. this is a shit non-solution. first, 97% of our customers are US-based. hosting elsewhere would destroy the site performance we worked hard to maximize. second, we're a us-based company, subject to US laws, so if the ISP doesnt take down our server, some other legal means will.