Re: Best practices on logical separation of abuse@ vs dmca@ role inboxes

[Daniel Corbe <dcorbe () hammerfiber com>]

at 8:56 PM, John Levine <johnl () iecc com> wrote:

> In article <ace5e592-b82f-1e26-fd8c-aa4831c6b91e () ceriz fr> you write:
> > I'm very sorry to read that, as an ISP, you have to comply with a
> > para-judicial process that puts you in charge of censorship.
>
> Dealing with DMCA notices is a matter of statute law in the US, and it
> is a really, really bad idea to ignore them unread.  It doesn't matter
> what anyone here thinks about it.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> PS: Here's why:
>
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/17420540355/sensing-blood-water-all-major-labels-sue-cox-ignoring-their-dmca-notices.shtml

This.

Plus I’m largely indifferent to it.   On one hand, I’m a firm believer in a  
free and open Internet.   But on the other hand, it’s so easy to hide your  
online activity that I have a hard time feeling sorry for anyone who gets  
caught up in the drag net.  Anyone who gets a notice from us is completely  
and utterly apathetic about online privacy and it’s astonishing to be just  
how lazy people really are.

I only have a few hundred users, so definitely not a representative sample  
size, but in all my time here we’ve only had a single repeat offender.