1430 upvotes, 28 direct replies (showing 25)
Q: Why aren't you banning these other subreddits which contain deplorable content?!
A: We remove what we're required to remove by law, and what violates any rules which we have set forth. Beyond that, we feel it is necessary to maintain as neutral a platform as possible, and to let the communities on reddit be represented by the actions of the people who participate in them. I believe the blog post speaks very well to this.
We have banned /r/TheFappening and related subreddits, for reasons I outlined above.
Every second a sub like http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/[1] is up after this you're basically saying that unless a person has enough money to hire an attorney, or is savvy enough to create a DMCA take down, or find your DMCA procedure to make you do work their stolen nude pictures are fair game. The victims might not even be aware of them.
1: http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/
That's reprehensible. Particularly given the tenor of that blog post and your comment about being shocked if it were your own family member. I don't know why you edited that part about family out.
Q: You profited on the gold given to users in these deplorable subreddits! Give it back / Give it to charity!
A: This is a tricky issue, one which we haven't figured out yet and that I'd welcome input on.
You could always follow the suit of the Prostate Cancer Foundation and return the money generated from someone else's stolen images and likeness used for commercial gain. I'm somewhat amazed an enterprising attorney hasn't hopped on that tort claim yet for one of these celebrities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quick edit - because I sound 'mean' and am not intending to come across that way - I think this is a good opportunity for the admins to prevent the victimization of people online and they should seize that chance.
Comment by bilyl at 07/09/2014 at 09:02 UTC
235 upvotes, 8 direct replies
"We remove what we're required to remove by law" is CYA-speech meaning "we'll do the bare minimum to make sure we don't get sued or arrested." Clearly reddit has a ton of other subreddits that host very illegal content, and their continual survival means that the admins don't think it's worth their time to actively look for these things unless there's a hint of trouble. They could just be honest and say "we don't have the manpower to monitor everything", but they clearly went the moral rationalization route about free speech and self-governance.
Comment by ZadocPaet at 07/09/2014 at 08:46 UTC*
380 upvotes, 15 direct replies
The victims might not even be aware of them.
Not only that, but he specifically said that if the copyright holder contacts them with the DCMA then they'll respond. The copyright holder is the photographer. So if some girl's ex boyfriend took nudes of her and posted them, and even if the girl finds out and sends in a take down request, she's not the copyright holder, he is, and therefore she can't legally make the request.
Edit: I think a bigger part of FapGate is that a lot of us see reddit as kind of internet heroes who should stand up against things like DMCA take downs.
Comment by That-one-guy12 at 07/09/2014 at 11:11 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Every second a sub like http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/[1] is up after this you're basically saying that unless a person has enough money to hire an attorney, or is savvy enough to create a DMCA take down, or find your DMCA procedure to make you do work their stolen nude pictures are fair game. The victims might not even be aware of them.
1: http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/
That pretty much sums up every option/thought we are all sharing. I didn't care much when I heard of the leaked photos. the fact that reddit is folding under pressure from people and their money shines a light on a greater problem on the double speak and hypocrisy that is reddit today.
Comment by [deleted] at 07/09/2014 at 09:51 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I don't want to click the link, as I have zero desire to see something that's violating people as much as is being described. But could you very briefly explain what photoplunder is, so I have a better picture of all that is going on in this discussion?
Comment by alienth at 07/09/2014 at 09:50 UTC
3 upvotes, 11 direct replies
Hiring an attorney is not necessary to issue a DMCA takedown notice. We receive takedown notices all the time from claimants who have no legal representation. You can find instructions on how to do so by a quick google search, and our DMCA contact info in our user agreement[1].
1: https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement
Photo plundering sites and subreddits, like /r/photoplunder, are linking to publicly accessible images on the internet. We have little recourse to get those photos off of the internet, other than to recommend owners finding them issue takedown notices to the companies hosting them.
If anyone has a suggestion on how we can help make it known to the original owners that their photos are unintentionally accessible on the internet, I'd be very interested in discussing it.
Comment by Norci at 07/09/2014 at 09:12 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Every second a sub like http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/
I'm not sure why that sub is brought up so often in this thread. According to their sidebar: "This is a place to share interesting pictures of women that we find in ***public view***." While creepy, that's not illegal.
Comment by salton at 07/09/2014 at 09:15 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
This point proves that lawyers guide the moral compass of Reddit. The site doesn't have the manpower for consistancy so we will wait for the next party with money and a legal team for any moral shift.
Comment by [deleted] at 07/09/2014 at 10:57 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
All good points. I think it's simply, when in doubt, what's gonna take less time/work to be dealt with. That's every company's view of their scope of operation. That being said, if they just took off thumbnails and allowed it to be entirely linked to, sorta passing the buck, would this be such an issue internally for reddit? Granted I understand thefappening was clogging the site and such, giving a bad name, but in all honesty, that sort of breaking news/cutting edge information becoming easily apparent is why we all come to reddit.
We come to Reddit to see what's good with the interwebs today (or 6 times a day). It just so happened, heavenly but supposedly illegally obtained photos were what's good on the interwebs for a good period of time there. Now that we know, I guess it's up to us to (reluctantly) find a new place where we can be kept informed and in the loop, no? I really don't wanna have a just celeb nood site that I go to aside from reddit, so I guess in the end, because I'm not seeking it out, I have been inhibited from encountering these types of supposedly illicit photos ever again.
Comment by ThatLeviathan at 07/09/2014 at 18:01 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Every second a sub like http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/[1] is up after this you're basically saying that unless a person has enough money to hire an attorney, or is savvy enough to create a DMCA take down, or find your DMCA procedure to make you do work their stolen nude pictures are fair game. The victims might not even be aware of them. That's reprehensible.
1: http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/
But that's not Reddit's fault any more than it's a hosting service's fault if I use their mail routers to send insulting emails to politicians. Nothing illegal has happened. If Reddit decided it was their job to enforce a morality of their choosing, it would not be a service worth using. We all might generally agree on what's reprehensible, but I bet we don't agree in what's creepy, or rude, or lame, or embarrassing, etc. Tons of people are likely offended by /r/blackpeoplegifs, /r/toosoon, /r/imgoingtohellforthis, etc. Should they be banned?
Comment by [deleted] at 07/09/2014 at 11:56 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Again I think the issue is more about the amount of resources these things were taking. reddit defends your right to free speech up to a point, but it is not willing to devote the vast majority of its bandwith and human resources into keeping something obnoxious alive.
Voltaire said "I disagree with what you say but I will defend until death your right to say it". reddit say "I disagree with what you say but I will defend until I get a bloody nose your right to say it, but at the point where people come for you with machetes, or when defending you takes over my entire life and makes it impossible for me to get anything else done then sorry but I'm outta here".
Comment by filologo at 07/09/2014 at 15:01 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I think this is a good opportunity for the admins to prevent the victimization of people online and they should seize that chance.
Personally I am glad they don't take that stance. Censorship is wrong and I don't think that it would be an effective way to deal with this problem. The line they are drawing in the sand (ie, child porn, breaking laws, etc) is a good one and should be maintained. This is a problem that we should solve as a people, culture and community. By advocating censorship you are taking away our opportunity to fix our societies problems with both race and gender.
This is our problem to fix, not the admins'.
Comment by gomez12 at 07/09/2014 at 15:47 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The victims might not even be aware of them.
Then there's no problem and no legal issues
I think he is quite clear. HE personally finds the pictures and the leak to be in bad taste. But they were taken down for legal reasons and the fact it was overwhelming reddit staff with problems. Photoplunder and others do not cause legal problems for reddit, so there is no reason to take them down. People here will be even more outraged if admins start imparting their own morality and deciding what is appropriate or not.
As long as it is not causing legal problems, it should be allowed.
Comment by LacquerCritic at 07/09/2014 at 09:10 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I think your questions aren't relevant because they didn't ban the subs for morality reasons, even if they have feelings about the morality of the issue. They banned them because the issues related to the subs (DMCA requests, child porn, malicious links, massive site-breaking traffic) was overwhelming the humans that run the site and the mod teams of the subs as well.
Comment by Adderkleet at 07/09/2014 at 09:31 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
That's how DMCA works. And that's the only reason why sites like Youtube, Imgur and Reddit can exist: You do not need active moderation of all submissions, you only need to act when a request is filed.
And if you DON'T act (even if the action is just "this is invalid, the stuff is hosted elsewhere, contact them"), you can get into serious trouble.
Comment by spacehogg at 07/09/2014 at 16:45 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Charities, fortunately have morals, and won't take it. Reddit doesn't have any morals, and will keep it. fyi - I don't believe it should be given back. Those who gave that money because of /r/TheFappening don't deserve to get it back. Starting that deplorable charity was really just a way to ease the conscience of the guilty. That money should go to getting a national law against events like this from happening.
Comment by brutefidget at 08/09/2014 at 00:11 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
While they are at it, they should ban /r/cringepics as well, because most of that content is stolen from people's private facebook accounts. Those people are being victimized as well, and most of them don't even know it. Hell, that sub is dedicated to bullying the people they steal from.
Comment by rindindin at 07/09/2014 at 14:09 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
It's a tricky situation cause they want to keep the money, but don't want to look bad while doing so.
Always so tricky when it comes to money and the public.
Comment by AellaGirl at 07/09/2014 at 11:16 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Anybody can issue a DMCA takedown. It's super easy and fast. All it takes is a quick form and an email to the host, seriously.
Comment by InvestigativeWork at 07/09/2014 at 20:22 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
You don't need a lawyer or money to file a DMCA claim.
You just need basic reading and writing skills.
Anyone can file one.
Comment by MoonReject at 07/09/2014 at 11:05 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
So photoplunder are photos that were sent directly to a person and they posted it on the sub?
Comment by [deleted] at 07/09/2014 at 08:51 UTC*
4 upvotes, 3 direct replies
[deleted]
Comment by withabeard at 07/09/2014 at 08:29 UTC*
-11 upvotes, 1 direct replies
you're basically saying that unless a person has enough money to hire an attorney to make you do work their stolen nude pictures are fair game.
We as a society (wider than reddit) have decided this. Not the reddit team.
The reddit team are abiding by both the spirit and the word of the law. You should both prove the content is to be taken down, and then make a legal request to do so.
The fact that we, as a society, have decided that to be allowed any kind of legal protection requires vast amount of funding, even if you are innocent/the injured, is not something the reddit admins themselves can change.
[ninja-edit] I'd be interested in knowing why the downvotes here? Just pointing out a fact about our legal system. Is it because inwardly you hate that this is true and you're taking it out on me? Fair game. Comment and discuss.
Comment by voneahhh at 07/09/2014 at 08:51 UTC
-2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
There's a slight difference between photo plunder and the fappening; while the photos from the fappening were obtained illegally via hacking/cracking/whatever the photos on photoplunder were originally uploaded publicly to photobucket, and not due to hacking/cracking/ etc.
Comment by rushworld at 07/09/2014 at 09:11 UTC
-1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Every second a sub like http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/[1] is up after this you're basically saying that unless a person has enough money to hire an attorney, or is savvy enough to create a DMCA take down, or find your DMCA procedure to make you do work their stolen nude pictures are fair game. The victims might not even be aware of them.
1: http://www.reddit.com/r/photoplunder/
Yes? Why should Reddit have to check for every piece of content and decide whether it breaks copyright or not? Is this what you want? Why is Reddit the judge and jury for every submission? Reddit has to follow DCMA laws and if they're given a DCMA claim to the magnitude for those other subreddits as they did for /r/TheFappening then they'll probably take the same actions.
Until someone makes a claim then Reddit doesn't have to take action. *Many* claims were made on the leaked images so Reddit had to take action... why is this still a talking point with people... Why is this so hard to understand?
Comment by OsmoticFerocity at 07/09/2014 at 11:39 UTC
0 upvotes, 1 direct replies
No, what they are doing is protecting their Safe Harbor status. Under the DMCA, a site operator cannot be held liable for content posted by its users as long as they respond appropriately and promptly to takedown requests. If an operator fails to do that, they can lose that protection. For the reasons you mentioned, I think you can understand why reddit losing its legal shield would be A Very Bad Thing.