Slashdot Mirror
Cloudflare Is Liable For Pirate Sites and Has No Safe Harbor, Publisher Says (torrentfreak.com)
After dragging Cloudflare to court and accusing the web services company of various types of copyright and trademark infringement, noting that several customers used Cloudflare's servers to distribute pirated content, adult publisher ALS Scan told the California District Court this week that the company should be held liable for copyright infringements committed by its customers. According to TorrentFreak, "The company requests a partial summary judgement, claiming that the CDN provider assists pirates and doesn't qualify for safe harbor protection." From the report: "The evidence is undisputed," ALS writes. "Cloudflare materially assists website operators in reproduction, distribution and display of copyrighted works, including infringing copies of ALS works. Cloudflare also masks information about pirate sites and their hosts." ALS anticipates that Cloudflare may argue that the company or its clients are protected by the DMCA's safe harbor provision, but contests this claim. The publisher notes that none of the customers registered the required paperwork at the U.S. Copyright Office. "Cloudflare may say that the Cloudflare Customer Sites are themselves service providers entitled to DMCA protections, however, none have qualified for safe harbors by submitting the required notices to the U.S. Copyright Office. Cloudflare may say that the Cloudflare Customer Sites are themselves service providers entitled to DMCA protections, however, none have qualified for safe harbors by submitting the required notices to the U.S. Copyright Office."
Cloudflare itself has no safe harbor protection either, they argue, because it operates differently than a service provider as defined in the DMCA. It's a "smart system" which also modifies content, instead of a "dumb pipe," they claim. In addition, the CDN provider is accused of failing to implement a reasonable policy that will terminate repeat offenders. "Cloudflare has no available safe harbors. Even if any safe harbors apply, Cloudflare has lost such safe harbors for failure to adopt and reasonably implement a policy including termination of repeat infringers," ALS writes. ALS now asks the court to issue a partial summary judgment ruling that Cloudflare is liable for contributory copyright infringement. If this motion is granted, a trial would only be needed to establish the damages amount.
Cloudflare itself has no safe harbor protection either, they argue, because it operates differently than a service provider as defined in the DMCA. It's a "smart system" which also modifies content, instead of a "dumb pipe," they claim. In addition, the CDN provider is accused of failing to implement a reasonable policy that will terminate repeat offenders. "Cloudflare has no available safe harbors. Even if any safe harbors apply, Cloudflare has lost such safe harbors for failure to adopt and reasonably implement a policy including termination of repeat infringers," ALS writes. ALS now asks the court to issue a partial summary judgment ruling that Cloudflare is liable for contributory copyright infringement. If this motion is granted, a trial would only be needed to establish the damages amount.
"Publisher Says" ... nuff said
When court says it, or legislation saying it actually says it, then it starts to mean something.
Right now, its just horseshit. (Much like that Nunes memo.)
What was the expression? A drowning man will clutch at a straw?
And, of course, "The evidence is undisputed". No need for a trial; just seize CF's bank accounts now...
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
... the offender.
The reasoning here would support my electric company's termination of service because I download copyrighted material.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Somehow I have a feeling that it actually is disputed. The disputing party? Cloudflare!
Someone should tell this lawyer asshat that words have meaning, and that using them incorrectly undisputedly makes him look stupid.
I volunteer to be on that jury, and demand they produce every bit of the evidence!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
If changing the content means taking on liability would that not imply that an ISP that modifies encrypted content is liable for infringement too?
---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam
Cloudflare is probably a massive NSA operation to track users across websites, including such things as intercepting their logins. It'll never be allowed to be taken down...
Nutria pointed out:
And, of course, "The evidence is undisputed". No need for a trial; just seize CF's bank accounts now...
This.
If Cloudflare is doing anything other than pleading guilty, the "evidence" is, by definition in dispute.
The argument presented in this motion is pure handwaving. Any competent Federal judge is going to dismiss it out of hand, because no actual evidence is cited - only the claims presented in the argument itself.
Claims and evidence are two legally distinct things, AFAIK. <DISCLAIMER>I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.</DISCLAIMER>
And then, of course, there's this. (WARNING: extremely NSFW!)
I think ALS needs a new lawyer ...
Check out my novel.
"NONE OF YOU FUCKING FAGGOTS CAN LIST ONE SINGLE SPECIFIC THING WRONG WITH THE MEMO! "
I mean, its biased, and lacks information, and omits context. It's poorly researched, and poorly sourced. Its all of 4 pages; that's absurdly thin. Then on top of that, it comes to a conclusion that has no legal basis, not even the cherry picked facts in the memo support its conclusion.
That's not why the memo is a big deal. The memo is a big deal because it represents the whitehouse's willingness to undermine its own DoJ, National Security, Intelligence oversight bodies. It's a step down the path to violating the separation of powers.
Trump needs to leave the DoJ alone. If the Mueller investigation ever reaches charges, Trump can fight them vigorously within the courts -- but he can't make this go way by the firing judges and prosecutors.
Well... perhaps he can... but if he does we now live in a tin pot dictatorship. And that's kind of a big deal.
Actually the one thing the memo proves is that there is a actual conspiracy within the Republican party in congress and Trump to obstruct the independent investigation.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
No comrade. You are incorrect.
If the memo were actually true and correct and its conclusions were founded in law instead of wishy-thinking, then Trump should let Mueller along his merry way; and sleep easy, and then destroy the case in court -- assuming the DoJ ever decided to even lay charges.
There's no possible need to fire mueller, and violate the separation between the exective and justice departments. Fight it in court where it belongs.
The reason this whole episode is a big deal is precisely because the white house is seeking to undermine the autonomy of the justice department.
Trump isn't some poor sap whose going to get railroaded into a false confession and sent to federal prison for life. He's going to have the best representation possible; and then appeals forever, and due to the unique situation what with him being the president there's going to be enough for the supreme court to chew on to last decades. And he appointed the last supreme court justice himself. He'll die of old age long before its over.
Firing Mueller is a gross abuse and violation of the separation of powers. Even sensible republicans think interfering in the DoJ is crossing the line.
The _eviodence_ need not be in dispute for a lawsuit or criminal prosecution to need to go to court. Whether an act is illegal can be in dispute. I'm particularly reminded of Edward Snowden, whose leaking of classified documents on NSA domestic spying is not in dispute. Whether he should be tried for treason, or given a Medal of Honor as a brave whistleblower is in dispute.
Was the Steele Dossier the basis for the FISA warrant (and much of the Russiagate investigation) or wasn't it? Lotsa table-pounders from both parties but this simple question is being avoided with a 20 foot pole.
Muller's investigation, like Ken Starr's before it, is a disgusting perversion of justice. Probable suspicion, initial investigation, probable cause, court proceedings is how this shit is supposed to work. None of the Russiagaters have come up with anything approaching probable suspicion, which means this is another open-ended writ of assistance where none of the indictments thus far have anything to do with Russiagate and Muller hasn't even bothered to examine the DNC servers.
Antique Geekmeister cautioned:,/p>
The _eviodence_ need not be in dispute for a lawsuit or criminal prosecution to need to go to court. Whether an act is illegal can be in dispute.
What you say is true. However, the points the quoted argument cites are not evidence. They're the plaintiff's lawyer's characterization of relationships between the defendant (Cloudflare) and third parties not named as co-dependents - a.k.a. "opinions" ...
Check out my novel.
So, why did you fight so hard to hide it from us again?
Because the evidence to refute it is also classified and Trump won't allow that to be released. Declassifying one side of the argument is cheating.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
The Democratic National Committee paid a law firm who paid Fusion GPS who paid a foreign spy who paid Russians for a dossier used by FBI for FISA warrant to wiretap Trump.
Federal officials conspired to spy on a rival political campaign using information they had not verified from people they knew were untrustworthy. And these officials deliberately and repeatedly defrauded the judiciary by withholding key information.
The most messed up part is that the Congressional committee is in charge of oversight of these intelligence agencies, not the other way around. For Rosenstein to threaten the committee because they're doing their job of oversight is stunning. These agencies have gone rogue and seem to feel they are unaccountable to anyone.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
According to then head of the DNC, Hillary rigged the primary to become the Democrat candidate for president. Easier to rig a primary that is built around super delegates than the national election which has the electoral college firewall.