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

171–180 of 323 posts

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#171

Post by starwed »

StrawberryFrog wrote: post #91
marshray wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We recently built a tool that allows us to ban links across the sytem (as of a few weeks ago) and I wasn't aware that the email auto-generated and sent a DMCA takedown email. This was a tool built for our support team and I'd never personally used it. Man you guys are dumb.

They could call it the "auto-perjury" system.

The form letter the OP got wasn't a DMCA takedown notice. The letter stated that a takedown notice had been received. That was untrue (the file was being removed for a different reason) but since no takedown notice was sent it certainly isn't perjury.

(Man, this thread is full of disinfo.)

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#172

Post by uxp »

random42 wrote: post #163
atacrawl wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is great, except you are punishing the crime, before it even occurred. This is pretty disingenuous. You really think their assumption that Dropship would quickly turn Dropbox into an illegal file sharing haven is an unrealistic grasping of straws?

As mentioned before, IANAL, and I do not have deep/any knowledge of the laws Dropbox is incorporated in. However, "Presumption of Innocence" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence ) aka "Innocent until proven guilty" is one of the universally applied (if not, also accepted), legal concept. Can dropship be used for illegal file sharing? Yes. Is dropship being used for illegal file sharing? No, until p…

Presumption of Innocence is only valid when being held or otherwise detained due to suspicion of guilt by the government, at least in the USA.

Dropbox is a private service, and any notices stating that users cannot sync certain files when they use their product under penalty of removal of their account can be enforced, just like any brick and mortar store can enforce a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" policy and refuse to give service to anyone they please, even for trivial matters like whether or not the patron/user is wearing clean socks.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#173

Post by starwed »

billymeltdown wrote: post #71
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…

If I may ask something quite specific: how do you justify _automated_ transmission of DMCA take-down requests? Shouldn't a human being be reviewing them first to prevent this sort of thing? Do you guys care? I mean, who's idea was that? As a customer and a developer, I'd really like to know.

There was no DMCA take-down request. The "DMCA email" claimed to be notification of a DMCA request, but the email was generated in error.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#174

Post by starwed »

gobongo wrote: post #79
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…

It is a shame your developers allowed you to commit perjury in such an automated fashion. With all due respect to you and your company (and while I fully support your right to invoke your TOS to take down content within your own service) I'd actually love to see one of the people you DMCA'd slam you on that aspect of this situation legally if for no other reason than to make other companies think twice (or three time…

Go back and reread the article. The recipient of the supposed takedown notice is listed as being... dropbox.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#175

Post by sycren »

TheAmazingIdiot wrote: post #164
sycren wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, how do you plan to stop people using dropbox like rapidshare? It would be easy for one to upload a file divided into multiple rar files and distribute them to different dropbox accounts. The only way you would be able to block this is watching for a large amount of downloads of a particular file and finding out the context of the file which may prove impossible (and possibly illegal). In terms of the…

If I wanted to be a complete ass about using dropbox for piracy, I'd use GPG. Share the GPG private key, the public key, the archive, and the password to use the key. It's too computationally expensive to automate opening these. And you could always spread the keys and keyphrase to where ever you want it. But dropbox works well for what it is. I see no reason to trash it with pirated stuff.

If dropbox opened the archives (to check) then it would be against the British data protection laws (and probably most other countries) if they were not given the access by the owners.

I have no want or need to trash it with pirated material either.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#176

Post by apgwoz »

burgerbrain wrote: post #157
apgwoz wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is any publicity ever bad? Isn't this Marketing 101?

Yeah, I wish I had a time machine so I could go pick up some SCO stock.

Assume for a moment that this makes the nightly news. How many people in "average joe" America who don't know about Dropbox will checkout it out and say, "oh man, this is useful! and they even have a free account!" Do they care about this DMCA garbage, or what Dropbox actually did/did not do? Maybe, but the national news won't report it correctly anyway. Here's how it might be spun:

"Hackers, today, are up in arms with Dropbox. The hackers claim that the illegal files being stored there were protected by the first amendment. Dropbox claims that their service could be attacked with those files and removed them."

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#177

Post by [deleted] »

dhouston wrote: post #106

drew from dropbox here. i hope you guys can give us the benefit of the doubt: when something pops up that encourages people to turn dropbox into the next rapidshare or equivalent (the title on HN was suggesting it could be the successor to torrents), you can imagine how that could ruin the service for everyone -- illegal file sharing has never been permitted and we take great pains to keep it off of dropbox. the inte…

[deleted]

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#178

Post by Goronmon »

cabalamat wrote: post #7
thecoffman wrote: post #2

I can see why Dropbox would be upset about the existence of such a thing, but trying to force people to take it down seems incredibly foolish. The whole issue will garner them negative publicity and people will see it anyways thanks to the Streisand effect. I had actually missed the original post, but now thanks to their takedown attempts I've downloaded a copy for myself as its very interesting.

> trying to force people to take it down seems incredibly foolish As does the fake DMCA takedown. If Arash Ferdowsi wants people to think he's dishonest, he's going the right way about it.

There was no DMCA takedown notice.

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#179

Post by dhouston »

tptacek wrote: post #100
knowtheory wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that the unjustified and unilateral removal of code from someone else's access or threatening anyone with legal action is ever an acceptable mistake, let alone "trivial". The law is not a toy, and it's not supposed to be wielded casually. The DCMA is certainly not treated with the respect it is supposed to afford citizens, and this is just another example of that.

We disagree. The mechanism for getting Github to take down code is the DMCA request; it's what you use when someone at Github is hosting code that they didn't own that you'd like removed and you feel you have some grounds to have removed. It was a mistake for them to use a DMCA request here, because the code was MIT-licensed and thus even the author can no longer ask for it to be taken down. But nobody paid legal fee…

We didn't file a takedown to github -- the author voluntarily took the code down

Re: Dropbox Attempts To Kill Open Source Project

#180

Post by res0nat0r »

random42 wrote: post #165
SwellJoe wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which is great, except you are punishing the crime, before it even occurred. No, they aren't. They're enforcing the terms of use that Dropbox users agreed to when signing up. I don't think asking folks to take stuff down was the correct solution...I think fixing the bug was the right solution, which they've also done. But, I don't see how Dropbox is "punishing" anyone, when they're just asking people to use the ser…

Yeah, I agree to enforcing the violation of ToS. I was writing for the DMCA take down notice for the possibility of illegal file sharing via dropship. (as mentioned by arash/drew in comments.) I am actually curious to know what ToS were violated (based on which Dropbox decided to take the action), except that I have not read about the real reason on either the Original Article or the discussion on HN. Can Drew/Arash…

> Can Drew/Arash clarify what Terms were being violated actually by dropship?

http://www.dropbox.com/dmca#terms

Access, tamper with, or use non-public areas of the Site (including but not limited to user folders not designated as 'public' or that you have not been given permission to access), Dropbox's computer systems, or the technical delivery systems of Dropbox's providers;

Attempt to access or search the Site, Content, Files or Services with any engine, software, tool, agent, device or mechanism other than the software and/or search agents provided by Dropbox or other generally available third-party web browsers (such as Microsoft Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox), including but not limited to browser automation tools;

Post reply on HN