Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Your Rights Online

150 Copyright Notices For Mega 199

Posted by timothy
from the well-that's-the-business-model dept.
Master Moose writes "Kim Dotcom's Mega file sharing site has been stung with 150 copyright warnings, according to an international report. Dotcom launched the new fire-sharing website on January 20 in a blaze of fireworks and publicity.Less than two weeks later and Computerworld.com is reporting the company removed content after receiving 150 copyright infringement notices." Raise your hand if you're shocked, simply shocked.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

150 Copyright Notices For Mega

Comments Filter:
  • 150 is significant? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BLKMGK (34057) <morejunk4meNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Thursday January 31, 2013 @10:09AM (#42750123) Homepage Journal

    He supposedly got a million subscribers on the first day, including myself. 150 takedown notices is significant in light of this? Google probably process that many in a half day and no one says a thing. That this new service has so few should probably be the news rather than the other way around. This seems pretty trivial to me, especially in light of the fact that his previous service handled so many takedowns that they granted the content folks special access like YouTube does. Bet he doesn't do that again...

  • Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 31, 2013 @10:16AM (#42750183)

    That question got me thinking. If Sony uploads copyrighted material (stripping out all the copyright notices and warnings), how am I as a user supposed to differentiate between the copyrighted material and the non-copyrighted material? That would be like Spalding stripping off the price tags on it's basketballs, throwing them in a donation bin, and then prosecuting anyone that took one for theft.

  • Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Scoth (879800) on Thursday January 31, 2013 @11:05AM (#42750633)

    Very much This. Keep in mind as well that the encryption was for *his* protection, not the users'. He wanted to be able to claim that he had no way of knowing what was uploaded or what its content was. That he's still getting copyright takedown notices should come as no surprise at all to anyone. The difference is he can at least try to claim that he had no idea it was copyrighted material. It'll be interesting arguments if it ever ends up in court or similar.

  • by GIL_Dude (850471) on Thursday January 31, 2013 @11:19AM (#42750783) Homepage
    Well since the files are encrypted, these 150 files are simply ones where the user shared the link and the key in the URL. This can also be done via mega-search.me. In fact, according to Ars Technica http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/01/wait-for-it-select-files-from-mega-now-indexed-on-third-party-site/ [arstechnica.com], several people have shared copyrighted material using Mega as storage and mega-search.me as the locator. These files can easily be checked by the copyright holder.
  • by Subgenius (95662) on Thursday January 31, 2013 @12:47PM (#42751857) Homepage

    Mega cannot see the contents of files. The DMCA notices are simply based on the filenames when linked through search engines.

    I created an 80 byte text file that contained the words "star" and "wars" in the FILE NAME, with the actual content being "This is a text file..." with no internal links or other content. Using the mega-&&&.me search engine, I posted the link NAME.

    Not surprisingly, I received a DMCA notice within 10 hours of uploading, SOLEY based on the file name.

    No big surprise here. I expected the result from the test.

  • by Subgenius (95662) on Thursday January 31, 2013 @01:13PM (#42752189) Homepage

    I've already filed a counter. I'm waiting to see what happens next.

I have not yet begun to byte!

Working...