:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

yeah i've never had a problem getting something pulled, quick and easy

Watch out Nalem! DWB has some people waiting for you at the next show you attend...
http://nikito.com/crowd.jpg

p.s. You're a douche for taking the $ from ICM, hope any reputation you had was worth what they are paying :2 cents:

I didn't say you did... I said to be protected under it or to truly be protected under it, then yes, you do. It's actually written in the law, both directions.

I was going to copy/paste but it's kinda big. Copyright Act, Chapter 5 section 512c2 - This covers the registered agent, and the key part is "and by providing to the Copyright Office, substantially the following information:" - Register yourself so people know who to bitch to.

Scroll up to Section 508a - key part "and registration number of each work involved in the action."

The key words, are AND, it doesn't say OR, it says AND. If you want to be protected under DMCA, you need to register as an agent. And if you want to use DMCA in your fight, then your work needs to be registered so ownership is proven.

Kinda silly to argue the law.

I agree, so let's take a look at this paragraph from an actual attorney:

"If you find a Web site that is using one of your images without permission, contact the hosting ISP to report the infringement. The letter you send is called a ?DMCA takedown notice.? The ISP is required to make its agent?s name and address available so that you can send them notification. Your copyright does not have to be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office for you to take advantage of this DMCA provision."

http://rising.blackstar.com/how-to-s...wn-notice.html

Are you reading what I'm writing or only reading what you want to read?

And that lawyer is wrong... a "takedown notice" does not grant rights to private information that hasn't been legally signed over by the person or courts. It asks to remove content, which means if you sent it to the ISP, to comply they have to get the content removed or remove it directly.

As well, "take advantage" as the lawyer says, is a far cry from being "protected under it." Which again, swings both ways... such as, a non registered agent is not protected under DMCA, thus can be sued without notice.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

When did you ever mention granting rights to private information? why do you keep bringing more shit into this?

Oh, the lawyer must be wrong? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

A photographer's image is protected by DMCA whether they register a copyright or not. You clearly don't know wtf you're talking about here, and I'm done discussing it.

Because requesting a persons information, name, address, etc without consent is a privacy violation. Sending a "takedown notice" does not grant that right, it's a notice to remove a copyright violation... period!

Yes he's wrong... but his focus was to point out that going through the ISP produces results when websites don't listen, so it really makes no difference if it's right or wrong.

Read the law, as I posted... stop making up your own versions or trying to translate a lawyers attempt to make a complex subject sound simple.

I'm out... vacation starts in 6 minutes.

There's a reason most of us don't even pay attention to him anymore. Arguing with him with the facts is futile. He's an expert in everything.

Fuck .xxx

Nail em

die or adapt.

You know what would work better.
Make a logo from "MC Affee" and say:

"We take care of your porn virus"
"Your Porn Protection"
"We look for porn all day"
"We scan all pornsites for you"

McAffee is $$$$$ company. Even didn't want their name in the press release cause it is porn.
How much negative comment will they take before they pull the plug?
And how much publicity would that get?

Maybe put a logo on all porn sites, we use McCoffee for save porn.
Or parody sites, McCoffee.com, for save porn surfing.

Just giving some ideas.

The rule of thirds. :2 cents:

http://myfilm.com/blogimage/guide.jpg