Comments on: Scribd piracy debate: Harry Potter, Ken Follett bestsellers among works ripped off

By: Christine

Christine — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:11:34 +0000

They also say they take “the concerns of copyright holders very seriously. It’s why we created our industry-leading copyright management system, which goes above and beyond requirements set forth in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.”

I guess that’s why anyone can go and find lots of illegally distributed books on their site with little effort.

I bet (and hope) the lawsuits are coming.

By: Gary D

Gary D — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:34:54 +0000

They claim The Times is full of it in a response.

http://blog.scribd.com/2009/03/30/what-ever-happened-to-fact-checking/

By: Chris Meadows

Chris Meadows — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:26:26 +0000

Well, IANAL (though even if I were a lawyer, I doubt I could pass up the excuse to type “ANAL” in all caps like that) but the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s “safe harbor” provision pretty much requires that they let people upload whatever they want.

If they police what people can upload before the fact, they lose “safe harbor” and become liable for anything someone does slip through.

If they follow the “safe harbor” rules, all they have to do is take stuff down once they find out about it and everything is all right.

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:46:49 +0000

I don’t like scribd. I don’t like that a site can make it possible for people to use their site for illegal distribution and then they pretend they don’t know, I think it’s lame as can be. Who do they think they’re fooling? Of course they know. I almost never go there because I don’t like that site, and I know. They created it purposely so people can upload whatever they want, then do nothing about getting rid of illegal distributions. I think authors and publishers should stop supporting the site, why do they support a site like this? I’d be glad if they were sued and it cost them dearly. I’d love to see copyright laws better upheld. I’m glad to see they are finally getting some trouble over this issue.

By: Paul Durrant

Paul Durrant — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:38:35 +0000

Legally, Scribd can’t afford to monitor content uploaded. This is because they’re relying on the “safe harbour” provision of the DMCA. So long as they don’t know that the infringing material is on their system they’re OK.

They currently insist on DMCA takedown notices before removing material, but I suspect that this is where they’re on shakiest legal grounds.

If something is such a blatant infringement that the “infringing activity would have been apparent to a reasonable person” they should still act to remove the material when they become aware of it.