This seems pretty normal to me. Isn’t needing to remove copyrighted files when asked by the holder how it already worked?
It’s better than content hosts being held liable by default. Public file sharing would be a non-starter without a safe harbor provision (where the host is only liable if they don’t remove items they’re made aware of).
Yes it did. I left out this paragraph that explains what changes with this decision (emphasis mine)
Dstorage’s final avenue was the French Supreme Court, where it argued that a court order was required before it had to remove specific content from its file-sharing services. The court rejected this argument, and that will be the final judgment in this matter.
This seems pretty normal to me. Isn’t needing to remove copyrighted files when asked by the holder how it already worked?
It’s better than content hosts being held liable by default. Public file sharing would be a non-starter without a safe harbor provision (where the host is only liable if they don’t remove items they’re made aware of).
It sounds like they already had a safe harbor even if they didn’t jump when a company said so.
Yes it did. I left out this paragraph that explains what changes with this decision (emphasis mine)