Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

razorfast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 323 posts

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#31

Post by elliottcarlson »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

"We have received a notification under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) from Dropbox that the following material is claimed to be infringing."

Doesn't this seem to imply that Dropbox is the owner of the code and is both the DCMA submitter as well as the company executing upon it?

An automated system would still require a company name that is requesting the DCMA to be entered, or your automated system is implying that all DCMA requests are coming from Dropbox. Something isn't right about this...

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#32

Post by superuser2 »

However justified you think piracy is, resisting efforts to turn a product you created for legitimate personal file sharing into a better BitTorrent is a valid business decision.

That's a really incendiary headline. Yes, they tried to kill an open source product, whose purpose was to facillitate illegal file sharing over DropBox.

The PR fallout from this among the tech community is probably nowhere near the fallout it would experience if it became the next Kazaa.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#34

Post by [deleted] »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

[deleted]

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#35

Post by switch007 »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

That's now your second edit...

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#36

Post by reynolds »

arashf wrote: post #30
reynolds wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally feel that Dropbox removing files from someone's account is completely wrong, regardless of your ToS. Your service is there to backup files. When you delete references to files from someone else's accounts, you're violating the trust that people put in your service.

We didn't remove the file - we simply banned public access to it.

Fair enough.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#37

Post by amock »

adamhowell wrote: post #9
cmatthias wrote: post #3

Wow, did not expect this from a savvy company like Dropbox. Filing a fake DMCA complaint? I think I'll take my files elsewhere.

Well that makes one of us who can live without Dropbox. Drew would have to kill a baby panda with an elephant tusk for me to even begin thinking about switching.

Do you need Dropbox or just something like it? Dropbox doesn't seem to have very strong network effects so it seems like it would be easy to replace with a similar product. If you're willing to give up features that require hashes to be shared across accounts you could even have a secure replacement with client side encryption.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#38

Post by yid »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

Hi Arash,

I find it hard to believe that you did not anticipate exactly this happening when designing (a) an online file backup service, (b) a "de"-duplication algorithm. That said, you should have planned for exactly this a long time ago, whether by the means DropShip used, or any of several other potential file sharing hacks. I think a lot of us here are disappointed with how your actions reflect that planning, or lack thereof.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#39

Post by sleazye »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

To razorfast guy: Can you look at the SMTP headers of the DMCA takedown to see if they're coming from a desktop e-mail client or indeed some sort of auto-mailer? Might give a clue if the e-mail was indeed "auto-generated" or not

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#40

Post by tghw »

arashf wrote: post #21

This is Arash from Dropbox. We removed the ability to share the project source code because it enables communications with our servers in a manner that is a violation of our Terms of Service. By our TOS, we reserve the right to terminate the account of users in this case. However, we chose to remove access to the file instead of terminating the account of the user. We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links…

Would you mind highlighting what part of the ToS this sort of thing violates?
Post reply on HN