91–100 of 269 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if you actually own the copyrighted content or have permission to have it?
Of course, that is an edge case which Google would need to figure out and perhaps, one of the many reasons they haven't done it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d place bets that >99.9999% of files on Google Drive are not.
Yes, but aren't the abusers now going to do exactly that?
This is deeply disturbing news. It is already a problem that people get their Google accounts closed without any explanation from Google and with no response from Google when they try to contact them. A story about Elin Killie Martinsen, a Norwegian journalist and writer who lost access to her book manuscripts this way, was recently run in the national newspaper Aftenposten ( https://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/i/8Qj1l…
It's slightly more, but this is why I have stuck with Dropbox. Their only business is storage and it means they are less likely to do things like this. They have't been in the news, that I have seen, about actions like this. Google is a consumer hostile company at this point. Unless you have a friend with pull there, or make it a big enough news issue, the little things are treated with automated hostility. Google is…
"...you must not even try to do any of the following ...: ...
- publish, share, or store materials that constitute child sexually exploitative material (including material which may not be illegal child sexual abuse material but which nonetheless sexually exploits or promotes the sexual exploitation of minors), unlawful pornography, or are otherwise indecent;
- publish, share, or store content that contains or promotes extreme acts of violence or terrorist activity, including terror propaganda;
- advocate bigotry or hatred against any person or group of people based on their race, religion, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or impairment;
...
We reserve the right to take appropriate action in response to violations of this policy, which could include removing or disabling access to content, suspending a user’s access to the Services, or terminating an account."
Quoting from their privacy FAQ:
"Examples of Dropbox processing your data in furtherance of its legitimate interests in operating our Services and business include:
...
- Investigating and preventing security issues and abuse of the Dropbox Services or Dropbox users."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it an edge case? Thanks to copyright's assault on the public domain, almost everything is copyrighted. Is making a backup of your movies, music, and e-books unusual?
What assault on public domain?
This is deeply disturbing news. It is already a problem that people get their Google accounts closed without any explanation from Google and with no response from Google when they try to contact them. A story about Elin Killie Martinsen, a Norwegian journalist and writer who lost access to her book manuscripts this way, was recently run in the national newspaper Aftenposten ( https://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/i/8Qj1l…
It's really bothering when the account just also happens to be your core email service so suddenly you have no way of recovering other accounts. Moving off Gmail is likely impossible for most non-technical folks.
This is deeply disturbing news. It is already a problem that people get their Google accounts closed without any explanation from Google and with no response from Google when they try to contact them. A story about Elin Killie Martinsen, a Norwegian journalist and writer who lost access to her book manuscripts this way, was recently run in the national newspaper Aftenposten ( https://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/i/8Qj1l…
It's really bothering when the account just also happens to be your core email service so suddenly you have no way of recovering other accounts. Moving off Gmail is likely impossible for most non-technical folks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maintaining a hash of say music files that are owned by large record label companies or a conglomerate like VeVo, match every audio file uploaded with the hash and if it matches, flag it, get it reviewed and if it matches, delete it?
That does not answer legality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's slightly more, but this is why I have stuck with Dropbox. Their only business is storage and it means they are less likely to do things like this. They have't been in the news, that I have seen, about actions like this. Google is a consumer hostile company at this point. Unless you have a friend with pull there, or make it a big enough news issue, the little things are treated with automated hostility. Google is…
Dropbox has the exact same policies and procedures, they just don't have the same technical abilities that Google has. Quoting from their AUP: "...you must not even try to do any of the following ...: ... - publish, share, or store materials that constitute child sexually exploitative material (including material which may not be illegal child sexual abuse material but which nonetheless sexually exploits or promotes…
Google says you can request a review if you believe something should not have been flagged as a ToS violation but no mention is given to any rights you have. To me this reads as "You can request whatever you want but it might not mean anything in reality.": https://support.google.com/docs/answer/2463328 Conversely, the information for how to report what you perceive as a ToS violation is far more complete: https://su…
The "but you can request a review!" handwaving all these massive tech platforms use to assuage concerns about heavy-handed (and coldly automated) policy application is really long overdue for serious consumer protection regulation.