Quote:
Originally Posted by aciuf
If we're talking about a legit hosting company, they can even terminate a site's services because of DMCA non compliance. But in Luckyshare's case things are more than complicated: 1. because they are passing through a CDN 2. because their hosting company is a really fishy one: ecatel
|
What has been stated here is incorrect in both law and effect. It is not helpful to post incorrect information.
No hosting company outside of the United States jurisdictional boundary is obligated to comply with or disconnect sites on the basis of non-compliance with US law. The only circumstances in which an overarching responsibility occurs in a non US jurisdiction is in the observation of treaty obligations and these matters are the responsibility of foreign governments to enforce.
The facts are simply that a company not within a US jurisdiction and not covered in some way by US jurisdiction, as in the case of a US owned entity operating abroad, is not required to observe the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The fact that some do observe it is simply convenient for the purposes of anti-piracy efforts however it is not guaranteed.
Each country has it's own copyright legislation, it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction whether or not this legislation can be effectively enforced in the online realm. Ecatel are only required to follow the laws of countries in which they have an effective residence or place of business.
It is very important to be very precise about these matters and spreading incorrect information is unhelpful as it leads people to adopt a view which is not consistent with the facts.
I have made this point clearly in early media interviews that I have done and also in this thread.
On the matter of a site using a CDN, this is not a factor in determining liability with regard to copyright infringement. In law the liability resides with the publisher and any party republishing content. If a CDN consistently republishes content then, unless it is afforded carrier status in a particular jurisdiction - such as the carrier status protections afforded in Australian law - then the CDN is just as liable for republishing the content.