Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Protect ipfs from claims of enabling piracy? #154

Closed
roryj78 opened this issue Mar 6, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

Protect ipfs from claims of enabling piracy? #154

roryj78 opened this issue Mar 6, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@roryj78
Copy link

roryj78 commented Mar 6, 2017

Hi (first post here so be gentle please!) - I'm reading up on IPFS and it all sounds very exciting groundbreaking, especially when you start getting FileCoin involved. Anyway, I would be interested to know how to intend to protect IPFS from claims that it enables piracy, or digital rights infringement etc?

Obviously I realise a completely decentralised protocol should be hard for authorities to "take down", however surely it would be better if the protocol did not attract this problem from the start? I'm sure the creators will not what themselves pursued by american or international courts, as well as all the bad publicity which will harm the project. When you start also talking about this forming the proof-of-work underwriting a currency, it becomes surely even more important that the legality of the underlying system is not called into question.

So, has any thought be put into this? I wonder if there are some simple steps that could protect the project from this, such as:

  1. A statement of intent and disclaimer to be accepted on installation?

  2. A system to enable authorities to do a "DRM take down" where authorities could apply for removal, perhaps requiring proof of ownership, and with a small extra admin task to double-check this (all run via the blockchain and perhaps with a small filecoin reward to the nodes who "vote" on this?)

I wonder if these might be enough to protect the project from legal action??

@lidel
Copy link
Member

lidel commented Mar 6, 2017

Welcome to the community! ✨

General approach is described in ipfs-inactive/faq#36 (comment)
In short: there will be "denylists" explicitly for this purpose, but AFAIK there are no specs for it yet
(so it makes sense to keep this ticket open here)

If you want to get a bigger picture, some interesting discussions related to this topic at ipfs/faq:

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 6, 2017

Thanks @lidel, excellent answer. I'll close this issue here since it's not the right place for general questions about the project. @roryj78 feel free to post follow-up questions in one of the existing issues.

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Mar 6, 2017
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants