An interesting post on the Register, which seems to indicate that a website has been found liable for inappropriately removing content, despite following a DMCA takedown procedure.
It's an Australian decision, and the reporting is not quite clear as to who was found liable, but it's an interesting one indeed — where a regime sets out an NTD approach, and a company follows it, should it be liable for the results of that removal? I would have to argue "no," as to argue otherwise would mean the ISP exercising some form of discretion, which is entirely inappropriate. Similarly, if this principle is followed, an ISP may be damned if they do, damned if they don't.
Lastly, there is the interesting question of applicable law and jurisdiction!
No comments:
Post a Comment