One of the most annoying memes of 2011 was Nyan Cat, so much so that it inspired a DMCA takedown notice and a counter-complaint.

     On one of the Support Foums I hang in, I found this message, supposedly from a Rapidshare.de Support member.  Some information has been removed in order to protect privacy/stupidity, but you’ll get the gist:

Im one of the support members who work for Rapidshare.com/.de who is responsible to make sure that no illegal software is uploaded to our servers. Recently about 1 week ago we have found out that one of your users who is hosting with you – domain: http://XXXXXX1.com indexes illegal links on his/her website.

Myself and other members of our support team has sent number of emails to your departments legal@YYYYY.com and abuse@YYYYY.com tho with no reply and no action taken.

I hope as a respective hosting provider you will take immediate action regarding this issue ASAP as we will have no other choice but to take this action further and report to IWF (Internet Watch Foundation).

Awaiting reply.

Kind Regards,
ZZZZZ

     An hour and a half later, ZZZZZ adds the following information:

Just to add our sytem has found out another domain'(s) hosted by you:
http://www.XXXXX2.com
http://www.XXXXX3.com

which contains illegal content too.

     In case you’re unfamiliar with Rapidshare, they’re a file sharing company who lets users put up whatever they want for download.  Of course, this creates all sorts of illegal uses, and Rapidshare.com is pretty quick about getting stuff taken down — when there are complaints.
     The German side, however, Rapidshare.de, is notoriously lazy in responding to Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Requests, complaints about Pirated Software, RIAA Music Complaints, Terrorist Content and, of course, some of the most vile atrocities involving children.  Due to their “slow” nature and their extremely strict adherence to bureaucray, they’ve become the haven of choice for illicit file sharing.

     XXXXX1-3.coms are, for all practical purposes, search engines for the content stored on Rapidshare.de, and host no content of their own.  Instead, they cull the Latest files as published by Rapidshare.de and put them into a nice, easily searchable engine so that most anyone can find whatever content is stored in the Fileshares at Rapidshare.de.

     The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) is an anti-child exploitation organization based in the United Kingdom.  They work with police, in the United Kingdom, to assist in the prevention of child exploitation over the Internet.  As noble an effort as they are, their jurisdiction is still only in the UK.

     YYYYY.com is a US-based entity.  Neither are XXXXX1.com, XXXXX2.com nor XXXXX3.com operated or owned by anyone in the UK.

     So, basically, ZZZZZ asserts that YYYYY.com is hosting the sites, XXXXX1-3.com, and that YYYYY.com should take those sites down because they are hosting “illegal links.”  He doesn’t provide those links, of course.  But him, being from a German-based file sharing company, threatens to report a US-based host to a UK-based enforcement organization due to failure to act in removing content that is solely hosted by Rapidshare.de?

     Excuse me, but *cough*bullsht*cough* what?

     This is clearly a case of the Pot calling the Kettle an African Slave, captured by armed men somewhere in the Transvaal region of South Africa in 1789, and the Dutch bastard selling him to the Portugeuse for shipment to the New World says to call him “Stefan.”
     i.e. The irony is so thick you’d have to cut it with industrial machinery.

     And per ZZZZZ’s complaint, anyone can completely understand YYYYY.com not taking the threat seriously…

     Can you say, “Bureaucratic Posturing,” boys and girls?

     I knew you could. 😉

Note: I have nothing to do with XXXXX1.com, XXXXX2.com, XXXXX3.com, YYYYY.com, ZZZZZ or Rapidshare.de. I’m just sayin’… *shakes head*

     By now, most everyone has heard about what happened at Digg… but in case you haven’t…

     The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) started sending Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) requests to Digg, whose user-supported community were giving kudos to some little cyberpunks who decided to post Cracks which would allow users to steal licensed content from HD-DVD movies.  These DMCA requests merely asked Digg to take down links to the crack-codes, which their community users had posted.
     Users on Digg revolted as the company began complying with the DMCA requests, and posted thousands upon thousands on links to the illegal material.  Eventually, Digg was forced to concede to the mutiny, as it put an enormous amount of pressure on the dotcom’s small number of owners.

     Digg shouldn’t’ve had to exhaust their resources trying to fight this stuff.  And this is the downfall of user-supported communities on the Internet… And the users who think it’s a matter of “free and protected speech” are actually just a bunch of thugs.
     There, I said it.
     And I’m right.

     Let’s think of it this way:
     Some guy is standing at your local Mall passing out keys that fit the front door of your office, along with a flyer that has your Alarm code on it.  Is that illegal?  Yes.
     The same guy goes and puts your office key and Alarm code on the bulletin board at a local University.  Is that illegal?  Yes.

     But if he went home, and posted the information on the Internet, along with a precise method to guarantee that you could create that same office key using materials you already own, then some asshat Lawyer would claim that it’s protected, free speech.  And that is completely wrong, and defies all logic.
     So I have to ask … What’s the difference between a guy doing any of those three things, and passing out “key” to crack an HD-DVD movie?

     There is no difference.  It is illegal.  It has been illegal.

     And anyone who helps the guy do it?  Aiding and abetting.  That’s been illegal for a few hundred years.

     But money talks… You can guarantee that right now, over this controversey, a bunch of Lawyers will get together with a plan to make money by setting ridiculous precedents, becoming experts and what can only be called bullshit.

     It’s happened before.  For instance…
     It was illegal to trade child pr0n.  However, a lot of people felt it was okay to do it via the Internet, and had Lawyers prove their case.  The overwhelming excuse by Lawyers was, “It’s the Internet — it’s not real.”
     *cough*bullshit*cough*
     Finally, a bunch of other Lawyers got together and decided to make a law against “trading child pr0n on the Internet.”  Did we need that law, when “trading child pr0n” was already illegal?
     It was a way to make a bunch of Lawyers a pile of free cash from an unsuspecting public who felt that giving Lawyers and lobbyists some money was the only way to make it end — instead of starting a grassroots campaign to enforce the existing laws that made trafficking child pr0n illegal.

     It really sucks that people won’t realize that.

     If you call someone and threaten their life, it’s illegal.  If you do it over the Internet, it’s illegal.
     If you have a restraining order against someone and they harrass you, it’s illegal.  Even if they do it over the Internet, it’s illegal.

     Why do we keep letting pedantic Lawyers tell us none of this stuff is real?

     Tell your Representatives: if it’s illegal in real life, it’s illegal on the Internet.  This kind of Legal seperation has to stop!

     Unless it’s between two consenting adults…

     [ Maybe I’ve watched too much Penn & Teller ]