Slashdot Mirror


After Celebrity Photo Leaks, 4chan Introduces DMCA Policy

davidshenba writes In the wake of leaked private photos of celebrities, 4chan has added Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown policy to its rules and policies. Under this new policy, the site will remove any notified and verified "infringement." It is not clear how effective this could be, or how 4chan is going to handle the inflow of notifications to restrict the content provided by users.

24 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. April's Fools Early? by The-Forge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I saw this I had to make sure it wasn't April 1st and that the article wasn't from The Onion.

    1. Re:April's Fools Early? by JosKarith · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I always wondered what would be the straw that broke 4chan's back - now we know.
      4chan is as good as dead, just like Alt.Tasteless before it. Time for the hordes of trolls, sickos, wannabes and script kiddies to find another pit to infest. Wonder where it'll be?
      So long 4chan. It's been fun but in time, all things pass.

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
    2. Re:April's Fools Early? by kheldan · · Score: 2

      This.
      4chan's fate was sealed as soon as it became mainstream; it was just a matter of time after that.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  2. Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought the whole purpose of 4chan was that "anything goes".
    If they start censoring it then all the people that are there will just move somewhere else that is not restricted.

    1. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Himmy32 · · Score: 4, Informative

      They've had a good amount of censorship for a while. Especially after they starting providing information on member posting very illegal content. It didn't kill the site then.

    2. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would be like /. getting rid of Taco, making it impossible to follow comment threads, and selling out to slashvertisers. I mean, could you even IMAGINE that??

    3. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by rioki · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The funny thing with this is that, since the half life of most posts is something around one or two hours, the system will remove any offending post before the DMCA can be processed. I expect that 99% of all DMCA requests can be forwarded to /dev/null. So yea...

      s/4chan/ebaumsworld/

    4. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Since one of the "celebrities" was under age when the photos were taken I suspect that the ante with respect to the legal ramifications may be a little higher than just a nasty letter from a lawyer. That sort of thing tends to focus the mind.

    5. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I thought the whole purpose of 4chan was that "anything goes".

      4chan has always had rules and restrictions. Things like loli and guro are not allowed to be posted outside of the Random board, certain boards are considered SFW and don't allow porn, and posters are required to be over 18 to post. All of these are enforced quite a bit, even so far as public bans for people who admit to being under 18 on the boards.

      Now this usually doesn't stop the users from just posting what they want (i.e. you can still find people posting porn on "worksafe" boards), but they do usually end up banned if they keep up with inappropriate behavior.

      And contrary to what people unfamiliar with 4chan believe, posting CP is a big no-no and will get you permanently banned. It's pretty much the most enforced rule, as reports for "illegal content" have higer priority than the site rules.

    6. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by rockout · · Score: 2

      Whatever passes for censorship in this case is pretty much irrelevant anyway. The pack of photos that started this was almost instantly on piratebay, and after almost four days it's still there with about 27,000 seeders. That won't go away on its own for a while and you don't see piratebay taking it down. The initial leak just happened to be from 4chan; the next such leak could come from almost anywhere.

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    7. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since one of the "celebrities" was under age when the photos were taken I suspect that the ante with respect to the legal ramifications may be a little higher than just a nasty letter from a lawyer. That sort of thing tends to focus the mind.

      Thats interesting. Since its then illegal to have those images it is not possible for anyone to give consent to storing them on iCloud.
      What is the legal status for hosting a server with illegal information on it?

    8. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like Usenet, it really isn't anything goes. Stuff that most people don't like is pushed off to alternative locations, there, bug not where anyone has to deal with it. What would kill 4chan, because evidently it runs with no significant budget or profit, would be a single lawsuit. By creating a belated DCMA policy, the site is protecting itself from such an event. Look at it this way. If Arthur Anderson had created a policy stating the conditions and intervals that documents would be destroyed, it might still be in existence today. But it did not, and panicked, and is gone. It is good that 4chan is being more forward thinking.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    9. Re: Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      Do people really file notices on those? I doubt it, because I see them in buzzfeed all of the time.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    10. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This. So basically 5 minutes until 4chan popularises a link to software which subtly changes an image to change the hash and other identifying features.

      You're welcome, Internet.

    11. Re:Doesn't this pretty much kill 4chan? by bytestorm · · Score: 3, Informative

      FMIQ (as implemented in the imgSeek server) is pretty good at detecting everything but crops, and that was 5-6 years ago when I last played with it. It likely has no problems with them now. This is a reasonably well solved problem.

  3. Effectiveness by Himmy32 · · Score: 2

    Image board like 4chan don't permanent host data. On the quick moving boards, images are gone before someone even could type up a DMCA request. Maybe they'll prevent that picture being posted again. I wonder how their members are going to react to new censorship.

    1. Re:Effectiveness by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You think the media publishers type up each individual request?

      I used to have a job where I handled them. They are pretty much auto-generated by companies that charge the content owners for each notice. Most are fake and it's a massive scam to steal money from them. We ended up deleting most of them as the data in them was clearly made up. Basically they are required by law to do "something" about DMCA complaint, and you're seeing it. The net effect will probably be nothing. We rarely got to then in under a week, so I suspect they will take even longer. By then, the threads would be dead anyway.

  4. Re:We are Anonymous. We are Legion. by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

    All your base are belong to DMCA

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  5. Technicalities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well with the ephemeral nature of 4chan posts, it seems like this is more of a technicality than anything. The big boards are pretty fast, so posts are automatically wiped after a few hours at most. Infringing content will probably be off the site by the time a content owner's lawyers have time to fire off an email. On slower boards, they can be up for days or maybe even months, but I doubt anyone would bother sending a DMCA for something on, for example, the papercraft board.

    All in all, it's probably just for moot to cover his ass and claim safe harbor, especially since content usually deletes itself in a few hours. Most of the time, he won't have to even do a thing.

  6. Re:Let me get this straight by Megane · · Score: 2

    You do know that all 4chan threads auto-expire, usually within an hour or two, sometimes a day or two if carefully bumped, right? DMCA basically says remove THAT item. Sure, bro, just a minute... oh look it's gone now!

    A recent change allowed threads on some boards (well, I only know /a/ does) to auto-archive on expire, which lets a thread hang around un-indexed for another two days or so. This is great when you have to go somewhere for a few hours, just leave the thread up and you can catch the rest of it when you get back. But eventually even those threads vanish into the primordial ooze like a zero-point energy of social media.

    There are also external sites which archive threads, but that's not 4chan's problem with regards to the DMCA.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  7. to clarify what this means. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    many people think 4chan is a place where 'anything goes.' thats not the case. the /b board is where the most shocking content submission and conversation happens, and its arguably been the one 4chans owner moot (christopher poole) has had the most trouble handling in the past. Poole determined rather early on that he was willing to sacrifice 4chans freedom of speech so long as someone was willing to foot the bill for his posh new york condo and hipster pedigree. He used to at least make a passing attempt at participation by dredging up old 4chan memes like 'crescent fresh' but lately its mostly mods and ops in his name that enforce the christmas hat overlays and such. Its nothing new though, 4chan has had a DMCA policy for nearly a decade and will gladly redact link content and ban users for posting torrents.

    poole has always done the DMCA shimmy because while leaks like this draw traffic, they also have the ability to draw him into protracted litigation and harm his advertising revenue stream. hes worried about celebrities in this case growing a pair and sending him to court personally, or attacking his advertisers.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  8. In other news... by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2

    Kappa Beta Phi has announced that it has a under-aged drinking policy, which it expects it's members to respect.

    The NSA has a policy against eavesdropping on phone calls, which it pinky promises it will observe.

    And finally, Slashdot is instituting a "No Trolls" policy, which First Post, Natalie Portman Naked and Petrified.

  9. This probably won't work. by Sasayaki · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This probably won't work, because either:

    1) The influx of content will overwhelm 4Chan's very few mods.
    2) Trolls will flag every single image and overwhelm 4Chan's very few mods.
    3) 4Chan's very few mods will not care.

    --
    Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
  10. Mods are asleep by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

    Post Ponies!