The essence of the problem is that American media corporations continue to struggle with the illegal copying of content on the Internet. They began to apply new methods of pressure and interpret existing copyright legislation in a very peculiar way.
For example, quite recently there was a truly
glaring case . Lawyers for the American Fox corporation sent the owner of the site Quicksilverscreen.com an angry
letter about the fact that the site Quicksilverscreen.com posted links to materials owned by Fox. A copy of the letter was sent to the hosting provider that hosted the site.
It should be noted that in the above blog really contains an extensive catalog of serials and cartoons. Among them,
“South Park” (10 seasons),
“Futurama” (5 seasons),
Lost (3 seasons) and many others, with direct links to each series.
After receiving the Fox claim, the blogger decided to temporarily change the format of the links on those pages that are listed in the letter of Fox lawyers (the text of the links is placed in text forms, so now you can’t start the video with one click), and also moved to hosting in Malaysia. Now he is going to consult with his lawyer about this.
')
As you know, lawyers have repeatedly discussed in the past whether links to pirated content are against the law, and they have found out - no, they are not. But the fact of receiving such a claim from a solid media corporation leads to dark thoughts.
Probably the same dark thoughts arose in the mind of some
Wikipedia editors, who are discussing the idea of
removing from the site all links to content that may be pirated . No one will check every link, so it’s proposed to remove absolutely all links to
YouTube , where the lion’s share of content is pirated. According to editors, this is fully consistent
with the Wikipedia
link placement rules , which do not recommend referencing pirated content.
Skeptics, however, object: for example, pirated content may also be in the
Google cache, so now, prohibit all links to google.com? Anyway, placing links to pirated content in any case can not be considered a violation of the law, as mentioned above.