zlacker

[return to "Itch.io Taken Down by Funko"]
1. leafo+W4[view] [source] 2024-12-09 08:19:52
>>spiral+(OP)
I'm the one running itch.io, so here's some more context for you:

From what I can tell, some person made a fan page for an existing Funko Pop video game (Funko Fusion), with links to the official site and screenshots of the game. The BrandShield software is probably instructed to eradicate all "unauthorized" use of their trademark, so they sent reports independently to our host and registrar claiming there was "fraud and phishing" going on, likely to cause escalation instead of doing the expected DMCA/cease-and-desist. Because of this, I honestly think they're the malicious actor in all of this. Their website, if you care: https://www.brandshield.com/

About 5 or 6 days ago, I received these reports on our host (Linode) and from our registrar (iwantmyname). I expressed my disappointment in my responses to both of them but told them I had removed the page and disabled the account. Linode confirmed and closed the case. iwantmyname never responded. This evening, I got a downtime alert, and while debugging, I noticed that the domain status had been set to "serverHold" on iwantmyname's domain panel. We have no other abuse reports from iwantmyname other than this one. I'm assuming no one on their end "closed" the ticket, so it went into an automatic system to disable the domain after some number of days.

I've been trying to get in touch with them via their abuse and support emails, but no response likely due to the time of day, so I decided to "escalate" the issue myself on social media.

◧◩
2. Restar+7a[view] [source] 2024-12-09 09:14:48
>>leafo+W4
This issue aside, thanks for doing what you do. I was kind of expecting Itch to get sold to some holdings or casino company at some point, as good things tend to go, but I've been happily surprised to see it mature independently throughout the years.
◧◩◪
3. Tepix+Ac[view] [source] 2024-12-09 09:39:38
>>Restar+7a
I agree itch.io is awesome!

Edit: And i'm happy to see that it's working again as of 2024-12-09 12:27 UTC+1

◧◩◪◨
4. raxxor+sD[view] [source] 2024-12-09 13:37:46
>>Tepix+Ac
And compared to that brandshield users should be branded by their business practices. Also the hoster as well.

Seems to be a difficult time for hosters and also again a demonstration that copyright law is deeply flawed, even if using stolen assets is a rising problem.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. saghm+vW[view] [source] 2024-12-09 15:55:18
>>raxxor+sD
I don't disagree that copyright law is deeply flawed, but even with the current law, it seems like this situation could easily have been avoided. The issue is one malicious private company (Brandshield) taking advantage of the negligence of another private company (the registrar) by claiming that a site was being used for "fraud and phishing". If anything, the parent comment from the person running the site makes me think that the situation would have been _less_ messed up if Brandshield had correctly asked for the offending copyrighted content to be taken down rather than falsely alleging something more severe. I understand that Brandshield probably has been incentivized to act this way due to copyright law, but I'd argue that even reasonable laws will sometimes cause bad actors to try to take advantage of things, and the easiest way to fight back against this isn't to try to change laws to avoid this but for non-malicious entities like the registrar not to allow their customers to get exploited by this sort of behavior.

Unfortunately, domain registration is an industry with so many of its own problems that I'm not sure "vote with your wallet" would be an effective strategy for changing things here. I honestly wonder if domain registration might be the more fruitful target for legislation protecting customers if the goal is specifically to avoid situations like this one, but even as someone who's usually unabashedly in favor of consumer protection regulations, I can't say I have a high degree of confidence that any changes here would be done effectively.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. raxxor+321[view] [source] 2024-12-09 16:33:21
>>saghm+vW
A bad law is bad if it leads to injustice even beyond its original scope. We have seen numerous problems with DMCA abuse and copyright strikes in other forms. We have patent trolling and this abuse artificially feds a whole industry of dubious lawyers. I think this is not even a small problem and all these factors combined does make it a bad law, even if it would still protect innovation like it once was to meant to do, which is questionable as well.

Of course services like the registrar need protection here too. And certain false copyright claims probably need consequences as well. The legal industry servers no function here.

Also, it would be legally trivial to make the user accountable for the offense, not the whole of itch.io. Sure, there would be problems here as well, but there is not large barrier to not have a parasitic legal industry and have those responsible that actually commit the offense.

The problem of enforcement cannot be put on the back of the platform itself.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. salawa+XI1[view] [source] 2024-12-09 20:42:07
>>raxxor+321
The platform will always be preferentially targeted because the larger you are the more you have to lose, the more likely it is you actualy have assets to go after if you don't deal with the alleged noncompliance.

How have y'all not realized that's how all this works?

It's why DNS is an anti-feature. As long as registrar's exist, it'll be an active lever utilized for basic deplatforming. Until everyone can host their own stuff, and networking is de-hub-and-spoked, this type of behavior will continue.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. ikiris+V72[view] [source] 2024-12-09 23:46:44
>>salawa+XI1
How do you expect people to find things without an authoritative lookup database?
[go to top]