Cloud Firm MediaFire Flags Malware Samples For DMCA Violation, Bans Researcher

chicksdaddy writes "A malicious software researcher finds herself in company with First Lady Michelle Obama and science fiction author Neil Gaiman: booted from the Web by hard-headed copyright protection algorithms, according to the Naked Security blog. Mila Parkour, a researcher who operates the Contagio malware blog, said on Thursday that she was kicked off the cloud based hosting service Mediafire, after three files she hosted there were flagged for copyright violations and ordered removed under the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The files included two compressed and encrypted malicious PDF files linked to Contagio blog posts from 2010. The firm responsible for filing the DMCA take down notice was Paris-based LeakID, which describes itself as a 'digital agency ...founded by experts from the world of radio, television and Internet.' LeakID markets 'Leaksearch,' an 'ownership tool that will alert you within seconds if your content...is being pirated.' According to Parkour, Mediafire received a notice from LeakID claiming that it was 'acting on behalf of the copyright owners,' though the owners and presumed copyrighted content weren't named."

Comments

Could be legit

[0racle]

Malware authors are content creators too. Don't they deserve the recognition and profits for their hard work?

Re:Could be legit

[pixelpusher220]

Since LeakID now claims ownership of this malware, can't we sue them for all damages it causes? After all, there likely wasn't a EULA with the 'malware'

Re:Could be legit

[Hatta]

If the authors aren't named, it's not a valid DMCA complaint. The real problem here is service providers taking down material without a valid complaint.

IIRC, the DMCA provides immunity for a service provider that takes down material persuant to a valid complaint. That implies that without a valid complaint, there would be a cause for action against the service provider. People need to start suing or there's no incentive for a service provider to obey the law.

Simple solution:

[pushing-robot]

Charge these organizations a nuisance fee for false positives. Problem solved.

Re:Simple solution:

[jkflying]

As AC alluded to, they can only be charged with perjury if they don't have rights to the work they claim is being infringed. If your work is nothing to do with the work they claim is infringed, you have no recourse. So to troll the system all you have to do is have a random copyright on something, and claim everything you see infringes on it.

Hold them to the fire

[Rurik]

LeakID (and/or their client) just claimed copyright over malware. Not just any malware, but targeted malware against a corporation for the intent of theft of intellectual property and unauthorized access of computer systems.

IANAL, but LeakID should then be held liable and responsible for their "copyrighted works".

Re:In the absence of teeth...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is happening to a friend of mine who is being stalked. An offshore firm has obtained access to her FB pictures, and filed takedown notices on every single one she has, even the ones from her phone. FB got tired of the DMCA notices (even though there was -zero- copyright liability anywhere) and suspended her account.

I guess the answer is to hold your photo collection offshore and just link to the contents, or have one link to blog, etc.

Re:In the absence of teeth...

[Khyber]

Why isn't this little story of yours made public? This would be a perfect opportunity to blackeye FB and the DMCA.

Re:Paris?

[mwvdlee]

Thanks to international copyright agreements, French (and a shitload of other countries') copyrights apply in the US as well. And since you don't have to be a US citizen to take legal action to a US company or citizen under US laws, they can. It's the same reason why a certain Swedish site can be sued for infringement of US copyrights according to Swedish laws.
You see it's a trade-off between security and freedom; companies gain security in exchange for citizens losing freedom.

Re:In the absence of teeth...

[girlintraining]

There is a reason these takedown companies are all moving off shore. This way they avoid the perjury penalty for filing false reports. Who has time to fly to Paris to file perjury claims against this company on their home turf, in a French Court.

All easily solved by simply saying that the forum chosen by the plaintiff is inconvenient. It's a simple motion to file in most jurisdictions -- if I live in Texas, and I sue you in New York, you can request the venue (that is, where the court is located, not which laws apply) be changed to New York, as you are the defendant and the burden is on the Plaintiff to prove damages, etc. It's all under the 'innocent until proven guilty' -- and not granting such a motion would prejudice the defense.

Unfortunately, such just and fair legal concepts have been thrown out... and nobody gives a damn. People are busy protesting crap like mortgage defaults, while the judiciary falls apart to the sound of silence.