Justpeace. Then why are processors cutting off file lockers?

You're free to sue us property owners anytime you want. Send me the name of your lawyers.

---------- Post added at 07:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:05 AM ----------

Except that file hosting is not a piracy product. File hosting is perfectly legal, if the provider stays within the bounds of the DMCA or the safe harbor law applicable in the payment processor's jurisdiction.
SFL has nothing to do with DMCA.

The amount of infringing content or the number of copyright complaints have no bearing on whether the file host is within the law.
This issue has nothing to do with staying within the law.

There are likely a lot of file hosts which due to their own culpable conduct or specific knowledge aren't covered by the DMCA or the equivalent EU safe harbor, but the SFL is really stretching the definition of piracy facilitation beyond what the law actually provides.
This issue has nothing to do with the law.

There is no legal duty on the party of a file host to proactively monitor user generated content. Predicating liability on a service provider's lack of proactive monitoring or filtering may in fact violate EU law.
This issue has nothing to do with the law.

Your sponsors should be very careful before impugning that any identified file host is illegal. It may well not be doing what you think it should to stem piracy, but claiming that a file host is facilitating piracy may amount to defamation.
Then sue. No one will because all SFL does is search for pirated content with the option of a faster paid download and reports the page to the processor. Take away the payment element and there is no one to report to.

The defamation burden in Australia law is very plaintiff friendly. Any file host company or owner may sue SFL in any jurisdiction whose courts are willing to entertain a libel action.
Any idea what they can sue SFL for?

And it's obvious why you don't dare to go after Rapidshare. They are big and have defended themselves in other real lawsuits.
So if Rapidshare were reported for having illegal content on their servers and asking money for downloading the file. Which is all true. When their processing is withdrawn, what law will they sue under? Reporting the truth isn't going to work.

JP This has nothing to do with the law. It's about whether a merchant is complying with the terms of his contract. A legal porn site can't process with Paypal, even if the porn is legal. And posters who continually refer to DMCA simply don't want to understand the truth. It's all about complying with a contract between the merchant and the processor.
filerking Reviewed by filerking on . new payment processor info since paypal has decided to get out of file host business, it seems a lot are using payza or webmoney, which one is the best and likely to not pull a paypal stunt? Rating: 5