August 7th, 2003
|
| Moderator | | Join Date: May 16th, 2003
Posts: 1,118
| |
Quote: Originally posted by sdsalsero
With FreeNet, Yes, you could search for a file and then accuse your proxies of 'distributing' it. But I don't think you'd be able to hold them liable for any legal responsibilities, not unless there's a sea change in the law. | The DMCA sees only few exceptions where you would not be liable for caching (not proxying, btw) illegal content and they are explicitly meant for online service providers. Quote: | And it's certainly more defensible than traditional P2P, where you must manually select what files to share/re-distribute. | Unlike other p2p you don't know what you will be sued for, - from secondary copyright infringement to distribution of childpornography. Quote: | True, one judge has ruled that Aimster is liable for contributory copyright-infringement despite it's use of encrypted communications to shield it from knowledge of the contents. But, by that logic, phone companies would be liable for contributory damages anytime a criminal used their phone to plan a crime. | Telephone companies can easily prove substantial noninfringing use. Once people start using Freenet primarily for filesharing that would be hard to claim - but this is a competely seperate issue from users caching copyrighted content. Won't work. The broadcasts will kill it.  |
Similar Threads 
Threaded Mode
