Are you kidding me? I'm supposed to report stuff like this to the police, who then are supposed to send a take-down notice, every time a user of mine is affected by something like this?
No. I'm sorry, but the application of the tiniest bit of common sense can do wonders. I send a URL to Cloudflare or Amazon. They see that this is, in fact, the same scam as they've seen hundreds or thousands of times before. Instead of "protecting" the free speech of the uploader, they instead recognize that this isn't free speech - it's an attempt to scam and defraud. Fraud is not protected free speech. They take it down without delay, they block the uploader, and everyone benefits.
Same with phishing sites - it doesn't take a genius to look at a "Bank of America" site and see that it's not, in fact, the real BoA, just like it doesn't take a genius to know that a "Flash Update" site isn't.
They make money. Therefore, they have the resources to do this. Don't make it out like they're just poor companies that are stuck between a rock and a hard place, because that's just plainly disingenuous.
The problem is if they take on that responsibility then if someone loses money to a phish are they liable for not taking it down fast enough?
No, I am not kidding you. You pay tax for your law enforcement to do this. They can easily automate legit legal take down requests. Why can't your cops enforce your laws? Why do random companies have to come up with inconsistent rules,process and response? It's nice to have someone to blame but if hollywood can go after DMCA law enforcement can also go after cybercrime -- it's their job!
Oh, and I did not make them out to be poor companies. My concern is that I don't want these companies anywhere near being responsible for take downs of user generated content what is harmful needs to be defined by lawmakers and enforced by law enforcement not by facebook and cloudflare. You're asking a store owner to inspect patrons for criminal behavior and kick them out when you should be calling 911 to get them arrested. The business owner can and should kick them out but the responsibility of enforcig that law is with cops.
> Are you kidding me? I'm supposed to report stuff like this to the police, who then are supposed to send a take-down notice, every time a user of mine is affected by something like this?
Yes, reporting malicious activity to police is the right thing to do.
> Same with phishing sites - it doesn't take a genius to look at a "Bank of America" site and see that it's not, in fact, the real BoA, just like it doesn't take a genius to know that a "Flash Update" site isn't.
What you think to be a non-genius is nonetheless genius to someone who doesn't understand how web sites work and what to look for.
No. I'm sorry, but the application of the tiniest bit of common sense can do wonders. I send a URL to Cloudflare or Amazon. They see that this is, in fact, the same scam as they've seen hundreds or thousands of times before. Instead of "protecting" the free speech of the uploader, they instead recognize that this isn't free speech - it's an attempt to scam and defraud. Fraud is not protected free speech. They take it down without delay, they block the uploader, and everyone benefits.
Same with phishing sites - it doesn't take a genius to look at a "Bank of America" site and see that it's not, in fact, the real BoA, just like it doesn't take a genius to know that a "Flash Update" site isn't.
They make money. Therefore, they have the resources to do this. Don't make it out like they're just poor companies that are stuck between a rock and a hard place, because that's just plainly disingenuous.