tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post439271833579640200..comments2024-03-20T10:01:20.599+00:00Comments on Dave Gorman: The Man From Degban, He Say, "Um... it wasn't us, honest!"Dave Gormanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-48150323978387329762015-12-08T11:09:59.197+00:002015-12-08T11:09:59.197+00:00Hey! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog bef...Hey! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after reading through some of the post I realized it’s new to me. here London based company, expertise in <a href="http://www.dkshopfrontshutters.co.uk" rel="nofollow">Shop Front</a>, Shop shutters, Electric Doors & shutters, vast experience, 95% customer satisfaction. Get your quote today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-87516294954045071032012-03-09T19:26:33.038+00:002012-03-09T19:26:33.038+00:00@Darren Jones: The google cache is useful... but I...@Darren Jones: The google cache is useful... but I can't make it find a cache of page 2. I'm hoping that by doing so I'll turn up some comment with an obvious search term that will demonstrate quite how Degban came to locate the photo.Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-1940154569876199902012-03-09T10:56:43.429+00:002012-03-09T10:56:43.429+00:00@Nigel P: But you don't mean that i should hav...@Nigel P: But you don't mean that i should have said Degban Sucks Some Serious Arse because Sucks Arse isn't a phrase. What phrase do you think I should have used? It needs to have a profanity as tame as the word 'ass' - so no F word, no C word, no cock, no dick, no bastard... all of which are more aggressive... but the same sense of invective. I can't think of one. Especially one that works for an international audience?<br /><br />Also... if you read through all of <i>this</i> and your reaction was, <i>"I'm not sure I approve of the chap's vocab!"</i> I think you rather missed the point.Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-76643765460929910392012-03-09T10:34:43.350+00:002012-03-09T10:34:43.350+00:00I agree with the other two - arse, not ass.
It...I agree with the other two - arse, not ass.<br /><br />It's bad enough most people sing in American without Brits adopting their diseased vocabulary.<br /><br />Next you'll be saying 'deplane',turning nouns into verbs and 'fragancing' your house.Nigel Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-1425774103927963862012-03-08T19:52:18.660+00:002012-03-08T19:52:18.660+00:00ass = donkey
and yes, it sucks a BIG donkey.ass = donkey<br /><br />and yes, it sucks a BIG donkey.Gnugoonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-73880576856178070102012-03-08T19:32:38.807+00:002012-03-08T19:32:38.807+00:00You're the second person to say that. It's...You're the second person to say that. It's an Americany sort of saying, isn't it. 'Ass' is a word. It fits nicely at the end of that sentence. Where's the probs? <br /><br />If we' weren't allowed to share language amongst countries we'd all have a dickens of a time expressing ourselves.Emma Spreadburyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00323158899767254919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-20939907993918400132012-03-08T19:02:52.896+00:002012-03-08T19:02:52.896+00:00Personally I have to agree, luckily for me youtube...Personally I have to agree, luckily for me youtube operates on DMCA but allows you to dispute it before auto deleting the content and as long as the content isn't banned in every country world wide it will remain in your libraries.<br /><br />But I recently had a similarish issue with 4 music companies making claims on "Henry hall and the BBC Orchestra version of Teddy Bears Picnic" which I though I was using under fair use, as it turned out I found the piece is public domain now but that was after all 4 companies claimed it, I disputed using youtube and they blocked the video in 237 countries saying they definitely owned it. After one slightly furious email I got a reply saying they were removing the claim as they found a mistake in their records or something.<br /><br />I do agree though DMCA is annoying as hell and by the sound of it a lot of companies abuse it and many others don't let you appeal before removing the object.Dwarvenhobblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05697311407765623376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-62378942693754253172012-03-08T15:21:32.947+00:002012-03-08T15:21:32.947+00:00Billy T:"This 'detective work' seems ...<b>Billy T:</b><i>"This 'detective work' seems to be a rehash of another sites conclusion. Timestamps appear to confirm."</i> <br /><br /><b>Me</b> Um... you've put detective work in quotes as if there's some claim being made by me on that score... which confuses me a little. I'm not sure what "detective work" you're referring to... but if another site has detailed the story of me having one of my photos removed from Flickr because of a bogus takedown from Degban before I did I'd be intrigued to hear about it. Do tell...Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-4770346157324010992012-03-08T12:59:36.098+00:002012-03-08T12:59:36.098+00:00Dave, If you turn javascript off and visit http://...Dave, If you turn javascript off and visit http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:oJuqC6vtPS0J:www.flickr.com/photos/dgbalancesrocks/85439592/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk (Google's cached copy of the page) you get the old comments. Doesn't fix the broken links but if you wanted to restore the comments in some form you could grab them here.Darren Joneshttp://www.homeinvaders.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-64437682318600270412012-03-08T12:53:32.434+00:002012-03-08T12:53:32.434+00:00Arse, not ass. You're not american.
(ironical...Arse, not ass. You're not american.<br /><br />(ironically, your page would be put in 'stasis' if you were!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-60188538744242908732012-03-08T12:38:08.149+00:002012-03-08T12:38:08.149+00:00Go get' em, Dave!
Until we get a photo-sharin...Go get' em, Dave!<br /><br />Until we get a photo-sharing community site with the same coverage as Flickr, but hosted beyond the jurisdiction of the ridiculously unbalanced DCMA, users' only hope is for people with tenacity and patience to show up this sort of cowardly behaviour.G*https://www.blogger.com/profile/06299127870284778834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-50591702390412468122012-03-08T12:26:53.608+00:002012-03-08T12:26:53.608+00:00This 'detective work' seems to be a rehash...This 'detective work' seems to be a rehash of another sites conclusion. Timestamps appear to confirm.BillyTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-81625738756748419392012-03-08T12:11:01.203+00:002012-03-08T12:11:01.203+00:00Viacom did the same to me after I tagged one of my...Viacom did the same to me after I tagged one of my music videos with the letters MTV (A generic Hong Kong term for a Music Video)<br /><br />There needs to be a burden of proof system in place. It might cost the big companies more (and make Mr Degban's job a little more difficult.) but it might stop the often random nature of their copyright claims.OrphanPixelshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16581285298338747971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-77667575267270874152012-03-08T03:16:35.706+00:002012-03-08T03:16:35.706+00:00One option is to try and get Flickr to change thei...One option is to try and get Flickr to change their policies - another is to use somewhere that is not hosted in the US.<br /><br />Not being funny, but you've fallen foul of a US law purely because your picture are hosted in the US. If they were hosted anywhere else, it'd be a different story.Tenbeghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13820301462566779941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-57408547693809830922012-03-07T12:14:34.117+00:002012-03-07T12:14:34.117+00:00Regarding the "I found this post on www.eff.o...Regarding the <i>"I found this post on www.eff.org:<br />'Flickr also introduced a number of improvements to the DMCA takedown process, motivated by the recent controversy surrounding the Obama-Joker image..."</i> I'm afraid the eff.org post isn't entirely accurate. That's what they do when the claim is made by someone in the US against someone who is in the US. It doesn't happen like that for anyone else.<br /><br />@Kyle Gordon: That's interesting. I vaguely knew about that case. I sort of <i>know</i> they <i>can</i> restore it but I'm not expecting them to do so. It gets embarrassing once they've told you they simply can't for them to backtrack and make the "impossible" happen.<br /><br />More to the point, I don't think this is about my individual case. While I'd love them to replace the content they removed, as per their obligation under the terms of the DMCA, if they do so, I won't really consider the issue closed.<br /><br />The solution I want is for them to change the way they handle DMCAs in future. They should hide the content not delete it while the process is ongoing. And they should change the way they communicate it to their customers so that instead of assuming they're the guilty party they allow for the fact that they might not be and offer advice to that effect.<br /><br />If they do all that, then whether or not they replace one page of their site doesn't really matter a jot.<br /><br />But if they do replace that missing content and don't change their process for the future... well then nothing at all will have really been achieved.Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-56928004703846423362012-03-06T16:10:43.268+00:002012-03-06T16:10:43.268+00:00"According to the DMCA sec. [512(g)(2)], the ...<i>"According to the DMCA sec. [512(g)(2)], the service provider is required to restore the taken down material. IANAL but it sounds like Flickr themselves are now in violation of the DMCA since they didn't restore your material.<br /><br />You may want to point that out to them."</i><br /><br /><b>Me</b>:I already have done. Yet to hear back from there.Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-54860396112415873202012-03-06T15:15:00.248+00:002012-03-06T15:15:00.248+00:00Dave,
According to the DMCA sec. [512(g)(2)], the...Dave,<br /><br />According to the DMCA sec. [512(g)(2)], the service provider is required to restore the taken down material. IANAL but it sounds like Flickr themselves are now in violation of the DMCA since they didn't restore your material.<br /><br />You may want to point that out to them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-18294436480956170382012-03-06T14:15:56.309+00:002012-03-06T14:15:56.309+00:00Flickr don't delete it, and if they do they ca...Flickr don't delete it, and if they do they can restore it. Have a look at http://www.geek.com/articles/news/flickr-manages-to-restore-deleted-pro-account-gives-user-25-years-free-membership-2011023/ for more info. They can restore comments, posts, pictures, external links, etc. <br /><br />Give them hell!Kyle Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07831300677404339700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-38648101421928600652012-03-06T13:46:20.498+00:002012-03-06T13:46:20.498+00:00I found this post on www.eff.org:
'Flickr also...I found this post on www.eff.org:<br />'Flickr also introduced a number of improvements to the DMCA takedown process, motivated by the recent controversy surrounding the Obama-Joker image posted by Flickr user Firas Alkhateeb. Most importantly, when a photo is removed, its title, description, comments, tags, and notes will remain available (YouTube could learn from this example!). This is an important improvement that preserves the discussion about the allegedly infringing material, something that a copyright owner is not entitled to censor with a DMCA takedown notice. Flickr will also restore the original image to its original context in response to a DMCA counter-notice, another important improvement. Too often, takedowns are sent for illegitimate censorial reasons, and if the user elects to submit a counter-notice, she should be able to restore the material to its original location, complete with its original context.'<br /><br />If this was true in 2009, surely the comments should have been left as is?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-67381557498475690802012-03-06T12:50:37.773+00:002012-03-06T12:50:37.773+00:00Hey guy, I work for a web host and I can confirm h...Hey guy, I work for a web host and I can confirm here - doesn't matter. When we get a DMCA notice you comply or we shut you down until you do. Granted you can preserve your links when its all said and done, but its still a huge pain. I really do wish there was a checks and balance system. I would say at least 1 out of every 10 claims is total BS and I feel sorry for the guy. We are forced to play the strongman for faceless corporations against our customers and it sucks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-3903207371684874312012-03-06T08:19:46.638+00:002012-03-06T08:19:46.638+00:00Eric Hunt: "At one point, after the last horr...<b>Eric Hunt:</b> <em>"At one point, after the last horrible false DMCA takedown at Flickr, they implemented a system where the image itself was replaced with a static phrase saying something like "removed for copyright claim" or somesuch. I've seen that page in the past. The page remained. No broken URL and no lost social activity.<br /><br />Recently I had to issue a takedown to Yahoo! Copyright against someone reposting my photos to their Flickr and I noticed they were no longer using the friendlier system - they'd gone back to the nuclear option."</em><br /><br /><b>Me</b>: I don't understand the reason but the first option is what they do when both parties - the photographer and the person filing the notice - are both US based. The nuclear option is what they do when that's not the case. See <a href="http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/104389/page3/#reply680712" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/104389/page3/#reply680712</a> for more.Dave Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260701102207639816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-88774969801630238862012-03-06T05:00:50.719+00:002012-03-06T05:00:50.719+00:00"pornographers are just as entitled to copyri..."pornographers are just as entitled to copyright as anyone else"<br /><br />Possibly not:<br /><br /><br />http://torrentfreak.com/you-cant-copyright-porn-bittorrent-defendant-insists-120206/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-60221381261766329902012-03-06T02:32:15.710+00:002012-03-06T02:32:15.710+00:00@Dave Gorman:
If you use Google to search for &quo...@Dave Gorman:<br />If you use Google to search for "link:[address]" - you can see all publicly indexed pages that contain links to said address.<br /><br />i.e. <br />link:www.flickr.com/photos/dgbalancesrocks/85439592/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-33795781088954431902012-03-06T00:54:01.807+00:002012-03-06T00:54:01.807+00:00You are very welcome, JessieG.
We work very hard a...You are very welcome, JessieG.<br />We work very hard at integrity here and so happy you noticed in this day and age. <br /><br />Cheers,<br />ColinColin Rowntreehttp://wasteland.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588205362847565197.post-72491569436116809222012-03-06T00:33:51.860+00:002012-03-06T00:33:51.860+00:00At one point, after the last horrible false DMCA t...At one point, after the last horrible false DMCA takedown at Flickr, they implemented a system where the image itself was replaced with a static phrase saying something like "removed for copyright claim" or somesuch. I've seen that page in the past. The page remained. No broken URL and no lost social activity.<br /><br />Recently I had to issue a takedown to Yahoo! Copyright against someone reposting my photos to their Flickr and I noticed they were no longer using the friendlier system - they'd gone back to the nuclear option.<br /><br />Layoffs at Flickr have been hard and continuous in the last few years. I suspect they have very little organizational historical knowledge and a process broke and had to be reverted to the last known good state.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07629739481965559684noreply@blogger.com