Comment by integralid
12 hours ago
I work with actually malicious content (things that make people lose their life savings) and Cloudflare abuse is relatively helpful (compared to most ISPs who just don't care).
They just refuse to take down random things that some media company representatives send their way, without a court order or any oversight. And this is a good thing.
Can you qualify "relatively helpful"? If you send them a ransomware site, a person looks at it, and still demand a court order... A company like them should know the scale at which these things are run, and that courts can't keep up with the speed.
>And this is a good thing.
Disagree. Demanding a court order for every single clear-cut case of infringement reported by the rightful owner of ephemeral content that is a infringed upon hundreds of times every day, causing nearly a billion dollar of losses per year... This is what the ISPs were trying to do and LaLiga successfully sued them, creating the modern fast-lane that CloudFlare complains about. Furthermore, unlike CloudFlare, the ISPs were not even profiting from the illegal content! This is a huge difference in the Spanish legal system. This will not end up good for them or for the open Internet they claim to defend (presumably as an excuse for taking their cut from cybercrime.)
> for every single clear-cut case of infringement
Clear-cut by whose judgement? Surely not the plaintiff, who has demonstrated no care for collateral damage. Witness the many, many fraudulent DMCA takedowns that are regularly sent, for a demonstration of what happens when prospective plaintiffs are given a power of "guilty until proven innocent".
> causing nearly a billion dollar of losses
I thought we were long past people believing the funny-money fake numbers claiming every download is a lost sale.