Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I think it's a sad state of affairs when people are using a site to show other people their favorite stuff and are technically breaking the law by doing so.


sort by: page size:

Why should this be any more illegal than looking at someone elses website?

It bothers me that you can be arrested for just being a member of a website.

What is the legality of a site like this?

Definitely already seeing illegal content (in basically any jurisdiction) being advertised. Really interesting look into how much of a moderation and legal service nightmare running this site must be.

Manipulating websites that way is likely illegal in a lot of countries.

If whatever they are doing is illegal then sue them and get the site taken down with a court order.

On the face of it, it's pure copyright infringement. I have no idea how the site intends to stay alive once it's big enough to make money. As soon as it attracts a decent user base, it'll be a great target for a lawsuit. Moreover, copyright infringement also carries criminal liability.

The sad part is that legitimate users are the ones being affected when the content actually infringes on other persons right. There must be a faster way to counternotice without the lose of revenue in case something untoward is happening.

It's sort of a big legal crazy gray area full of pitfalls and madness. I am far from a laywer, but it appears that if you intentionally turn a blind eye towards the user generated content UNTIL there is a complaint, ract with an immediate and complete takedown, then it seems OK. Maybe? Who knows?

That and it's really funny. You're ripping me off? Surprise! Your site's made of porn now! It's enjoyable in a somewhat twisted way, a la schadenfreude.

I don't know if I would call legal channels "ineffective" and I'm not anarchist enough to say that you "must" be a vigilante when they don't work. But yeah, sometimes it's really enjoyable to get back at people.

There's nothing wrong with being morally wrong. (Just as long as you're not hurting anyone, in my opinion.)


Yikes. Sounds like kind of a scummy thing to be doing to well-meaning sites.

I see what you're saying and that may technically be true.

I'm not really arguing the legality of the issue though. I'm just talking about the spirit of what the content authors were trying to accomplish which I believe is: have some random person on the internet see their post and, subsequently, arrive at some sort of mutually beneficial arrangement with that person.


Not to mention: when did it become a crime to post links to your own site? If it catches on -- fine. If not, no big deal.

Just thinking out loud, but the website owner could add a clause to its terms of service that explicitely forbid this - it could become a motive for account suspension.

Doesn't even need to be illegal, just really bad for their reputation. There's a reason companies like to plaster everything with "This doesn't necessarily reflect our opinion", here they're doing the exact opposite. Any kind of questionable content in any medium is automatically their IP? Good luck.

It seems like a lot of those sites focusing on funny pictures and videos of people getting hurt have tons of content that they don't own nor have the right to put online to earn a profit.

This is what websites want you to think.

Do it badly -> annoy users -> no more laws that protect users.


My thought exactly...

there was a recent thread on HN about how immoral Getty's business model is, sending veiled treats to people regarding the use of content they don't even own at first place.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22340178


No, I'm not okay with that, but I don't think someone who linked to that copycat site is committing a crime!
next

Legal | privacy