3

Overview As described, only the last of these seems to be compliant ways of obtaining consent, and indeed even that is not fully compliant, although features not described might make it so. However, if there is a lawful basis for processing PI other than consent, under GDPR article 6, then there is no need to obtain consent at all, and doing so in an ...


3

You're talking about sites like Youtube, so I'll focus on that. That quote, which you bolded, was over-simplified. The actual law is 17 USC 512 (c) Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users. (1) In general. A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other ...


3

If soemoen sues you for infringement of a design copyright, it would be a valid defense that the plaintiff had in fact taken the design elements from your prior work, or indeed from the work of a third party, and so had no valid copyright. Proving this may be easy or hard, depending on the specifics of the situation. Registration will prove that your work ...


2

Does this EU court ruling effectively allow paying customers to remove a DRM product which is slowing down their game? It depends on whether (1) the DRM materially impairs the performance of the game, (2) there is no alternative [practical] solution, and (3) the extent of the modification does not go beyond what is necessary. Regarding elements (2) and (3) ...


2

Not on its face DRM are a deliberate “feature” of the software and cannot therefore be considered an “error” that the user is entitled to “correct”.


1

Rewards I’m going to use “reward” rather than “bounty” as in modern usage, bounty has a stronger connotation of apprehending or killing a criminal and I hope that’s not what your website is about. In common law, advertising that you will pay a reward for a certain action is an offer made to the world that will form a legally binding contract with the first ...


1

No Are these statements enough to prevent a content owner from successfully suing dribbble.com? Such statements in a ToS or user agreement are helpful, but will not, standing alone prevent a suit for copyright or trademark infringement against the site. First of all, it is possible that simply uploading an image or other content infringes the copyright, if ...


1

If a user uploads protected material owned by Y, this warranty does not mean that Y cannot sue the website. This clause is related to the Indemnification clause #12. The user promises that they will not upload another person's stuff. If they do, that is a violation of the TOS. The indemnification clause says that the user will "take the hit" if the ...


1

A per-user subscription fee alone would be unlikely to cause safe harbor status to be lost. However, if much of the provider's business is in fact due to infringing content, such that vigorously acting to remove infringing content would significantly harm the provider's income, that might well cause the loss of safe harbor status. Much the same is true of ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible