Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
imagine the world you trying to claim exist, if you make one single cent of profit offering a service that could potentially be used as infringement you could have yourself driven into bankruptcy.
the entire economy would grind to a halt, hell isp charge money based on bandwidth they make money when people use bit torrent to pirate moves.
|
More ill-conceived nonsense. Do you even think about what you write before you write it?
An ISP clearly has no direct benefit from its users uploading to torrents. The YouTube/Viacom (learn to spell the company's name at least) case was completely different. Google is smart enough to put ads only on content from a verified source. They don't have an affiliate scheme that pays people to upload.
You may not agree with the wording of the DMCA, but the bad comes with the good. The law exempts safe harbor to service providers if they receive a direct monetary benefit, and they have (as all file sharing companies do) the ability to individually control what content is made available from their servers.
These file sharing companies have taken off because RapidShare (wisely) no longer offers an incentive to infringe. When they ceased their per-download affiliate payment model, precisely because of the potential for loss of safe harbor, the ill-informed hosters jumped in to fill the void. Now that their businesses have grown to something worth protecting, you watch: they'll either change their business model, or be sued to the last dime they have.