[tahoe-dev] Pubgrid is back

[Richard Johnson]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 01:55:07AM +0200, David Triendl wrote:
> * While copyright issues within a distributed file system are an interesting
>   topic, the takedown was not for a file in some distributed storage grid, it
>   was for a file that was served via my web interface. No matter which nodes
>   actually provided the file, the rightholder saw that my webinterface was
>   serving that file and asked me to take it down.

The rightholder's view is not always reality, however.  Like anyone else,
they will typically reach for the easiest turnoff switch.  The question
this raises is how to direct them to the proper turnoff switch for the
service (with the attitude of "give them what is proper, not necessarily
what they ask for"), if turning off access is even possible.

The tor project faces somewhat the same issue.  There, a DMCA takedown
demand or other more reasonable copyright violation notice delivered to a
tor operator is not reasonably possible to satisfy, as the party who
receives the takedown request does not host or provide the data.

Similarly, it's my understanding that any number of interfaces to a tahoe-
lafs grid may provide access to the base distributed data storage.  Here,
it seems to me a takedown request is not reasonable for any given "router"
to that storage.  A single web interface does not host the data at issue.

If I find my own pictures or videos being shown publicly without proper
compensation, and wish to have the unauthorized copies taken down, how do I
reach the actual holder of the data in a manner that is understandable?
Can I also do it in a manner, should they wish to comply with my request,
that is actionable?

I'm not advocating for changes in tahoe-lafs to support such removal.  That
way lie the kinds of security risks created by CALEA and other "lawful
intercept" requirements.  But it's worth thinking about how to pass the
info on for legitimate "please stop serving my content" requests.


Richard

-------
PS - For what it's worth, in my job (in the USA) I mainly see DMCA abuses.
I've not actually seen a single legitimate DMCA notice.  The ones I see as
part of my work are from people or firms who do not actually own the
content or represent the rightholder.  This does not stop them perjuring
themselves in claiming that they are the rightholder, or that they
represent same.

Most often this false claim of rights is an error.  In the case of those
misusing the DMCA for SLAPP-like action, they're kooks trying to intimidate
and chill the participation of my users in public debate.  In the case of
those in the corrupt DMCA Takedown Industry, they're knowingly cutting
corners that result in their misidentification of content as theirs or
their customer's, and worse, they continue to do this repeatedly even
after being warned.

In neither case do we want to take down content based on such false and
improper claims.