Re: [Openpacket-devel] New Beta Site Live

[Jeremy S. <st...@pa...>]

I'm no lawyer, however, the law appears to be on our side in this instance.

A lesser-known provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) 
called the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act 
provides safe harbor for online service providers (such as ISPs and 
websites) from prosecution in the event copyrighted material is uploaded 
by a third party.

 From Wikipedia:

"DMCA Title II, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation 
Act 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act> 
("OCILLA") creates a safe harbor 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_harbor> for online service providers 
(OSPs, including ISPs) against copyright liability if they adhere to and 
qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block 
access to allegedly infringing material (or remove such material from 
their systems) if they receive a notification claiming infringement from 
a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent. OCILLA also includes 
a counter-notification provision that offers OSPs a safe harbor from 
liability to their users, if the material upon notice from such users 
claiming that the material in question is not, in fact, infringing. 
OCILLA also provides for subpoenas 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpoena> to OSPs to provide their users' 
identity."

More at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act

If OpenPacket abides by the terms set forth in OCILLA, we should be 
absolved from responsibility for any suspected copyright infringement, 
assuming that any subpoenas received are promptly addressed. 
Furthermore, providing an easily accessible, off-the-record system for 
removing uploaded captures should greatly reduce the likelihood of being 
faced with legal action in the first place.

Granted, I don't know how or whether this applies beyond copyright law 
(for example, captures containing social security numbers or similar 
personal data), but it's a start.

Whether or not moderators take any initiative to check for private data 
in submitted captures needs to be explicitly stated. Personally I think 
it's most practical to take a completely hands-off approach unless a 
complaint is issued by an end user. In any case, users must be forced to 
acknowledge OpenPacket assumes zero responsibility for uploaded content.

Stretch

Richard Bejtlich wrote:
> On 10/16/07, Tim Furlong <fu...@cc...> wrote:
>   
>> A good analogy might be the sites like YouTube that host user-submitted
>> content and the posting of copyrighted material (and, to a lesser extent,
>> private information).  So far, they seem to be getting away with just having
>> mechanisms for copyright holders to request that the site remove their
>> material - my lay impression is that they have not been successfully sued
>> for damages yet.
>>
>>     
>
> This is the right model, I think.  I also like the idea of adding a
> "request removal" to each trace instead of expecting someone to send
> an email.  If we receive a removal request that appears legitimate, I
> will not hesitate to remove the trace.
>
> Even with these restrictions I think we could have a useful site!
>
> Richard
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Openpacket-devel mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openpacket-devel
>
>