Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Abstruse" data-source="post: 9564185" data-attributes="member: 6669048">Citing the DMCA and CDA are pretty funny because neither of those laws work that way.The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) is about piracy and unauthorized use of copyrighted intellectual property. It's for taking down videos, images, writings, audio, etc. that depict copyrighted, trademarked, or otherwise protected material. If somebody uploads your song or image, or someone uploads a video featuring you prominently without your permission, you use the DMCA. It has nothing to do with libel, slander, or defamation. You can't use the DMCA just because somebody said something you don't agree with (and the attempts to do so were always based on copyright claims - video game developers issuing DMCA takedowns for bad reviews on YouTube for example based on claiming rights to the footage).The CDA (Communications Decency Act) is about adult content on the internet. It requires age verification (the "Are you 18 or over? Yes or No" screen) on content that is inappropriate for children. It also states that ISPs (internet service providers) like your internet company or web hosting companies are not publishers are therefore aren't responsible for the content that users post. Meaning not only does it also have absolutely nothing to do with slander, libel, or defamation but it also would absolve EN World from responsibility depending on your read as whether or not Morrus' post is content posted by a user or by the actual site (which would likely need lawyers and a court involved to determine considering Morrus owns EN World).To add the cherry on top, though its servers are in the United States, EN World is not an American company. It's based out of England. The DMCA and CDA are both American laws that apply to American companies. So the CDA doubly doesn't apply because it would require going after the American hosting companies - which are not publishers and thus not responsible for the content they host. Meanwhile, they're - attempting to make a DMCA claim against a company likely not subject to the DMCA.And in addition to all of this...libel, slander, and defamation require the information being distributed to not only be false but the person distributing it to know it is false Considering how well-cited the original article is, that's going to be very difficult to prove in a court.So yeah, there's no way an actual law firm drafted that letter. And if they did, EGG got ripped off because nothing in that letter holds any legal weight.</blockquote>

Verification