Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Web Hosting : content removal

[damina]

Hello, I have been a client of bluehost.com for 7 years. My websites hosted there include small companies for web design, travel agencies and my work as filmmaker and photographer.

In the past week someone has made a claim regarding some photos on my photography website claiming that they should be removed.

Although these photos do not depict the person who is making the claim, bluehost.com announced to me that it is my responsibility to prove that the claim is false. After 7 years of being a customer they do not beleive me and believe a random person.

In other words the legal department of bluehost want me to prove to them I am NOT guilty.

It is very strange because I always thought that everyone is presumed inoccent until it is proven they are guilty.

Please let me know what you think about that. I am thinking of leaving bluehost and perhaps taking legal action against them for causing damage to my business and insulting my personality.

[cpanellover]

Originally Posted by damina

Hello, I have been a client of bluehost.com for 7 years. My websites hosted there include small companies for web design, travel agencies and my work as filmmaker and photographer.

In the past week someone has made a claim regarding some photos on my photography website claiming that they should be removed.

Although these photos do not depict the person who is making the claim, bluehost.com announced to me that it is my responsibility to prove that the claim is false. After 7 years of being a customer they do not beleive me and believe a random person.

In other words the legal department of bluehost want me to prove to them I am NOT guilty.

It is very strange because I always thought that everyone is presumed inoccent until it is proven they are guilty.

Please let me know what you think about that. I am thinking of leaving bluehost and perhaps taking legal action against them for causing damage to my business and insulting my personality.

What exactely is the problem here ? It is normal they demand you to proof that claimn is wrong.The time you are a customer doesn't matter in this case as if they don't act they might get in legal trouble.Just give them proof the other party is wrong (if you have it hehe) and problem solved if you can't provide that proof i'm afraid your in trouble.Legal action against bluehost ? you don't have a leg to stand on and you should be verry happy they give you a chance to proof the other party is wrong ....

[damina]

well, they also should be very happy to have me as a customer as well.

And they should try to keep their customers happy. All of them. This is how business works.

But I am not sure that legally this is correct. Because If one day one gets derranged and suddenly contacts 100 webhosts regarding 100 different websites that should take down their content, this should not be so esay to do. One should be able to prove something when making a claim. Otherwise people can very simply take content from other peoples pages whenever they feel like it.

This is somehow cyber terrororism and there should be a law taking that into account.

[bear]

It's a simple enough request, provide proof you have the rights to display those images and move on.

[DmitrijCSR]

Originally Posted by damina

Please let me know what you think about that. I am thinking of leaving bluehost and perhaps taking legal action against them for causing damage to my business and insulting my personality.

Best of luck to you, but just don't regret throwing your money on court services just because you refused to cooperate with your hosting provider who was investing most likely a simple DMCA claim.

Originally Posted by damina

And they should try to keep their customers happy. All of them. This is how business works.

This is how business should work. It doesn't work that way in reality. For a corporate company like bluehost you are just +/- few dollars of monthly income.

[davson]

It’s not clear at all what the complaint is, what the position of the complainer is, and what Bluehost’s demand is. In cases like this, it’s important to be as specific as possible.

If it’s a case of permissions, Damina as a photographer should be familiar with model and subject release documents; there are, however, less clear areas regarding art, satire, and journalism practices, although there is case law on all of these.

It’s another matter if someone as an unrelated third party is complaining about content. This is where it becomes most serious for all of us. Damina is quite right to be worried about individual or, worse, organized efforts to censor and remove “objectionable” text and images from websites and blogs. Hosts have become considerably more reactionary and defensive in this since the recent brouhaha over SOPA, et. al., regardless of whether certain laws are passed or not. Bluehost has now acquired a reputation as a host that reacts before investigating, and discourages content or shuts down sites that may be in the least bit contentious and in any way “threatens their business.”

[SparkNode]

I would think the person filing the complaint would have to provide some sort of proof that the images are owned by them or that they can't legally be posted on this website. If they did that, then it would rest on the shoulders of the owner of the site to dispute that evidence or provide alternative evidence. Obviously Bluehost has to take these complaints seriously and protect their network reputation and other clients. However, there should also be a requirement of evidence to validate the complaint before taking drastic actions.
That being said, does this other person own these images? or are they just not happy they are being displayed?

[Wullie]

Did you file a counter claim? That is all Bluehost should need.

The counter claim then gives the other party 10 days to file an action seeking a court order and unless they do that, Bluehost must legally restore the files.

If Bluehost won't abide by this, move to a host that follows the law and doesn't just make up their own rules.

[kpmedia]

Originally Posted by HivelocityDA

I would think the person filing the complaint would have to provide some sort of proof that the images are owned by them or that they can't legally be posted on this website.

That's how DMCA is supposed to work.
However, worthless hosts just act on whatever piece of garbage they get via email.

[bqinternet]

Originally Posted by damina

perhaps taking legal action against them for causing damage to my business and insulting my personality.

BlueHost is stuck in a sticky situation because of how the DMCA works. If they receive a proper DMCA notice, they have to take the content down within a reasonable period (say 48 hours... it's not actually defined). If you feel that you've been wronged, you can file a counter-claim. If the complainant doesn't respond to your counter-claim (e.g. by suing you) within 10 days, BlueHost has to restore your files.

It's not a perfect system. If you don't like it, talk to Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA

[Aldryic C'boas]

Proper DMCAs have to list specific material and locations (ie - image foo on page bar). Hosts are only obligated to ensure the mentioned content is removed; DMCA is not a blanket case to take down an entire site. You can resolve this easily by simply temporarily removing the supposedly infringing content until the situation is resolved, or by giving one of their techs permission to remove the files.

Originally Posted by damina

Hello, I have been a client of bluehost.com for 7 years.

Originally Posted by damina

After 7 years of being a customer they do not beleive me and believe a random person.

Originally Posted by damina

I am thinking of leaving bluehost and perhaps taking legal action against them for causing damage to my business and insulting my personality.

Seven years of service, and you're ready to walk away and talk lawsuits from a fairly minor incident? I have a feeling we're not hearing the entire story here.

[ninak]

Originally Posted by Aldryic C'boas

Proper DMCAs have to list specific material and locations (ie - image foo on page bar). Hosts are only obligated to ensure the mentioned content is removed; DMCA is not a blanket case to take down an entire site. You can resolve this easily by simply temporarily removing the supposedly infringing content until the situation is resolved, or by giving one of their techs permission to remove the files.

Yes this is true, but there are a few companies out there that will suspend the whole reseller account with just a note from or hint of impending DMCA.
I personally do know a host that did this. They did not even want to hear about any proof. (The girl was a commision based reseller for a guy selling children's educational software. She had the proof that he promised to pay commission at 25% of all items sold and that he would refund her for any web hosting. When it was time to collect he threatened with a DMCA. The company that we had our reseller program at the time shut everything down. When shown the proof there reaction was that they have to settle on there own but the site had to be shut down. It was because she no longer would deal with the software guy and not because they wanted it that way. )Left them in a big hurry.

[Aldryic C'boas]

Oh, I'm not denying that there are some providers that will do that. Just pointing out that the ones that will obviously haven't done their homework on how to properly handle the situation.

[raindog308]

Originally Posted by bear

It's a simple enough request, provide proof you have the rights to display those images and move on.

Silly question but...how do you prove it?

If it's a picture I took, how do I prove that I'm the one who took it?

[Aldryic C'boas]

Originally Posted by raindog308

Silly question but...how do you prove it?

If it's a picture I took, how do I prove that I'm the one who took it?

For digital pictures, either the content of the photo (a pic of you and friends, your dog, house, etc) that you can clearly identify and prove, or a watermark.

For film pictures, having the original prints or negatives is often enough.