Legal Concern Regarding IPS Add-ons (Need Advice)

[Razor S Edge]

Kenichi Tanaka, herein lies the issue, even if this app would be illegal in the United States (Im not going to debate the legality of ICE seizing websites using this app) the fact remains that A) IPB has done nothing illegal. B) They have made it known what you do with an app is on you and to make sure you know what it is before you use it. C) IPB is not limited to the USA. So even IF the app is illegal here, it may be usable in other countries still (and as long as the site owner lives in another country and domains, hosting, etc are in another country, there is not a thing ICE can do about it. D) Website owners should know their regions laws regarding what content can and cannot be hosted/displayed/linked to etc. Failure to do that and getting your website seized is just their own fault for not asking themselves and finding out "is this legal?".

I have to agree with some of the other posters that this tread was started to make debate. All you have to do talk with support is send a nice detailed email to them explaining your thoughts and worries. I mean, one of our best marketplace developers has a mod that will let you display something that is illegal in some places but not others, should we take his files off IPB too?

Basically unless its an app that has hidden malicious codes in it, hacks your stuff, hacks your visitors, then there is no reason to worry.

[CrossFire-Radio]

Someone linking to a Music file from some other website is not illegal at all...Because if that was the case... Myspace would have been shut down many moons ago because of the music posted on members profiles (metallica, ozzy, etc)

On another hand, most 'servers" hosting musical content arent in the United States.. and are in other country.. the USA can do nothing about that as our laws are different then most countries when it comes to music, music content, and what is placed on a website..

The same goes for the Youtube Mod, if you post a youtube video on your profile with a video from Metallica..That is not illegal, as its only used on your profile from another website..

The ones that would get "caught" for that, would be youtube.. not the messageboard however, seeings Youtube is hooked up with WB records.. theres alot of musical content that has been removed from videos on there.

If you feel that music on someones profile is indeed illegal.. It would be in your best interest to contact RIAA, SoundExchange, SESAC, ASCAP, and/or BMI. And not so much contacting IPS Support. As the Mod itself and the musical content displayed in that mod on members profiles, is not illegal. And Believe me.. Ive been running my internet radio station for the past almost 6 years and have dealt with alot of legalities in the music industry in order to keep my station legal for playing main stream music. (We pay royalties, among other things to stay legal.)

(Just my 2 cents) :D

[Rheddy]

I get what everybody is saying and I would be the first to say it wouldn't be illegal. But, websites are being seized because they are simply "linking" to that material. When I originally posted in the support topic for the hook, I was only trying to alert those using the hook, not make an issue out of the legality of it. Unfortunately, someone decided that they didn't want me to alert anyone on it so the post was deleted.

This will explain why I decided to alert everyone about this: http://www.infowars....ghted-material/ Apparently, someone in the government doesn't care if it could be illegal because it's been happening.

[JahLion]

This making no sense to me,so you are saying that if i link videos from youtube i'm breaking some law,give me a break it's just URL you copy and past as long you not uploading any thing to the server no one can't shut you're site down,i've not used that OP hooks and have no plans on using them but to play a youtube video on you're site in you're profile are where ever on you're site it's not you that will be in trouble it's the person on youtube because they ones who upload the content and then youtube give the public a share link to use on your website so there is no sense in this what so ever.

[hammerstringz]

I'm not a lawyer, but my current understanding is that places like forums, social networks (like Facebook, craigslist, youtube, etc.) is not responsible for what their members post. Just as long as the site is not setting up some sort of category like "Share Illegal Links Here" or something like that, couldn't you make a case that it's discriminating that they don't touch networks that allow posting of links to members (such as the sites listed above)? YouTube is filled with ppl sharing copywrited music/video/etc. Your ToS may also be a protection for you, as well as banning those that others give 'reputation' to or what-naught? Could it be possible that those sites that are being seized were contributing by encouraging others to act illegally by basing their site on it? I don't know, those are just my thoughts. I read that article you posted, things do seem to be getting a bit out of balance. But the way it is now, with some domain name providers, i've read stories where they sometimes suspend a domain name just on RUMORS or accusations of content sharing etc with a suspend first, look into it later attitude. Spooky, agreed. But they haven't shut down YouTube, Craigslist, Facebook, etc. based on what members post/link, so....

[Razor S Edge]

But, websites are being seized because they are simply "linking" to that material.

This is a pretty strong unsupported statement. In fact I researched this to see what support and other news might be out there and in fact after much time searching the most recent news I could come up with was from November of 2010. ALSO, every website involved in those seizures where not just "linking" they were P2P file transfer sites, bit torrent sites, etc.

Your beginning to sound like the forum member that cried wolf. Wheres your supporting proof, links, screenshots, etc of noteworthy news articles or actual statements from the Department of Homeland Security (which is in charge of ICE)?

[• Jay •]

Okay, since you won't shut up about it until you're told to bring it up with IPS...

Go ahead, e-mail IPS and communicate your concern!

I don't know why you needed to seek permission to send an e-mail.

Just be prepared to get the answer you've already gotten right here in this very thread. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it isn't right.

[bfarber]

1) I'm not a lawyer, so I can't tell you what is and isn't illegal. My understanding is that the DMCA laws in the US were enacted to allow website operators a fair chance at removing content deemed illegal. If you have something illegal on your website, the copyright owner should send you a DMCA request to remove it, and then it is up to you to comply or not.

Setting that aside, however, if you have legal concerns about running your site, a lawyer is the best to talk to. I'd be very wary of taking any legal advice from anyone on the internet, without strong evidence that they know the laws and what they are talking about.

2) Nothing requires the modification in question to be used illegally. As Collin pointed out, it could be used so that new guitarists can play their music on their profiles, or so that local bands can play some demo tracks on their profiles. There are many indie music sites on the internet, and many mainstream music artists often put out free music. At the end of the day, just because software can be used in an illegal fashion does not make the software itself illegal.


I know which file you are referring to, and I do not see any need to remove it. If you feel the modification author should warn the users of the addon, you should contact the author and advise them of this and why. It is then up to the author whether they agree or not.