WE cant download from filesonic and then megaupload bc of being down and wupload is pulling a FILESONIC MOVE! THIS SUCKS!!! ibelieve if i were to choose a website to upload PR episodes will be Fileserve.com ilove that website
There's still Oron ) ) ) ) ) sry i can't say it without laughing
Here are a few hosts that are up that I trust: rapidshare (SLOW! 30kb/s non-premium, but better than their last idea) depositfiles (fine) oron (ok download but LONG wait between files) filefactory (works fine but can pull down quickly) jumbofiles (multi download capable, fine) netload (slow for me but others have said fine) Mediafire (don't know how I forgot them...) rapidgator (fine)
vg, isn't that how it works with studios? They don't care about any excuse the file sharing companies use.
Anyway I'm sure mediafire will disable public sharing much like fileserve has or perhaps they'll get stricter with sharing by forcing users to create accounts like 4shared did. However mediafire does get rid of anything that is reported as copyright infringement. I'm not sure how WUpload was with removing copyright infringement but I'm assuming they got rid of stuff pretty quickly too but now in WUpload's case it doesn't really matter due to disabling sharing.
fact of the matter is that these sites are not violating US copyright law. They are protected under the DMCA and if they actually bothered to fight back, they would win whatever bs case the MPAA can place against them.
All of these cyberlocker sites have ways of allowing copyright owners to submit take down notices, which are responded to. That fact provides them "safe harbor" status under the DMCA.
These sites are service providers and under US copyright law, a service provider is in no way required to police the use of it's own service. These cyberlockers are in no way required to police each and every file uploaded to their service. It is not their responsibility, nor can they be held liable for anything uploaded to their site. It is the responsibility of the copyright owner to submit proper takedown notices for any file that is infringing on their copyright. As long as the service provider responds to those notices and takes down any file with a legitimate, proper claim from the copyright holder, they have done what they are required to do under US law and are free from any liability of the file being hosted on their site.
This provision in the DMCA is the same thing that allows sites like YouTube to operate as YouTube, and therefore Google, are not held in any way liable for content uploaded to the site as long as they respond to proper takedown notices. The user is responsible for what they upload, not the site itself. Without such provisions, YouTube could not operate as it is impossible to police every single video uploaded to the site.
The DMCA is a outdated piece of legislation with many, many, many issues and I, for the most part, disagree with the laws provided by it. However, this is one instance where the very law the MPAA are claiming these sites are infringing upon in fact supports the side of the cyberlockers.
Comments
Here are a few hosts that are up that I trust:
rapidshare (SLOW! 30kb/s non-premium, but better than their last idea)
depositfiles (fine)
oron (ok download but LONG wait between files)
filefactory (works fine but can pull down quickly)
jumbofiles (multi download capable, fine)
netload (slow for me but others have said fine)
Mediafire (don't know how I forgot them...)
rapidgator (fine)
Anyway I'm sure mediafire will disable public sharing much like fileserve has or perhaps they'll get stricter with sharing by forcing users to create accounts like 4shared did. However mediafire does get rid of anything that is reported as copyright infringement. I'm not sure how WUpload was with removing copyright infringement but I'm assuming they got rid of stuff pretty quickly too but now in WUpload's case it doesn't really matter due to disabling sharing.
All of these cyberlocker sites have ways of allowing copyright owners to submit take down notices, which are responded to. That fact provides them "safe harbor" status under the DMCA.
These sites are service providers and under US copyright law, a service provider is in no way required to police the use of it's own service. These cyberlockers are in no way required to police each and every file uploaded to their service. It is not their responsibility, nor can they be held liable for anything uploaded to their site. It is the responsibility of the copyright owner to submit proper takedown notices for any file that is infringing on their copyright. As long as the service provider responds to those notices and takes down any file with a legitimate, proper claim from the copyright holder, they have done what they are required to do under US law and are free from any liability of the file being hosted on their site.
This provision in the DMCA is the same thing that allows sites like YouTube to operate as YouTube, and therefore Google, are not held in any way liable for content uploaded to the site as long as they respond to proper takedown notices. The user is responsible for what they upload, not the site itself. Without such provisions, YouTube could not operate as it is impossible to police every single video uploaded to the site.
The DMCA is a outdated piece of legislation with many, many, many issues and I, for the most part, disagree with the laws provided by it. However, this is one instance where the very law the MPAA are claiming these sites are infringing upon in fact supports the side of the cyberlockers.