All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Nonic Cloud / Oxide force you to comply with bogus DMCA requests from Russia
I was a happy customer of Nonic (a subsidiary of Oxide Hosting) for a couple months, till I received a DMCA request asking us to take down certain content hosted on our invidious instance, that the Russian government felt was against their ideology.
These kind of requests are normal, and are generally ignored by providers, especially so after a reply from the user.
Legally speaking, such invidious instances don't have to comply with most DMCA requests since they have to be directed at YouTube themselves (see: https://docs.invidious.io/takedown), and especially not one from a foreign government which does not have any rights or control over the content.
It is worth noting that the administrators of the server in question, the payment method, Nonic, and the server (Netherlands) are all way out of the jurisdiction of the Russian government
However, for some weird reason, Nonic insisted on us complying with the bogus DMCA complaint, stating that they couldn't take risks with their "relationship with upstreams", which makes no sense considering there is no way in hell that a provider, registered in the UK with servers in the Netherlands, had upstreams who wanted to be complicit with the censorship by the Russian government.
I have documented the entire email chain if any of you are interested: https://doc.projectsegfau.lt/AJ9cY24eQbS12Isnka1ipQ?view=#
Comments
@NicholasOXI
Nonic seems to be kind of a funny bunch. How would you be able to comply anyways? Break into YT's datacenter and pull the plug of the server hosting the supposedly offensive video? ...
Well we just blocked the route on our webserver so the DMCA complaint can be closed
Russia sending DMCAs holy balls this epic.
You mean you blocked the URL? Well, i see how that would make sense to avoid a trigger happy abuse desk drone triggering a termination but i really wouldn't let them off the hook that easily. The complaint is as bogus as it could be. You aren't the correct receiver and i highly doubt the Russian government is actually the rights holder anyways.
This is not a DMCA, i.e. not a copyright claim. This is censorship due to political reasons, by Roscomnadzor. Nonic (and you) seem to misinterpret the report, that's not surprising since it doesn't state the reason for the takedown request.
Worst they could do is to block your instance by the domain name (by Host/SNI) in Russia. They could also block by IP address, but only in some exceptional cases.
I don’t see why anyone should even reply to such request from Russia and even forward it to their customers… Why should this risk the relation to their upstream in any way? Did you cancel and move to another provider?
Do you really think that because of political relations there is no interaction between countries now? Interpol still works. YouTube removes videos at the request of any party if they receive an official request from any country.
So whoever was admitted did something serious if they got a request like this.
It's not about that. The Russian censorship ministry requires you to take down the content because that content is illegal in Russia. I opened the original URL from the E-Mail quoted, and it still kinda worked, it seems to be the YouTube channel of some fringe organization who dreams to break up the country. Aside all that, @AryaK are you and Nonic under Russian jurisdiction now? Guess better not mention Navalny then, either. Or just change the hoster to a less retarded one.
Dmca from russia is the same as scam letters. Same value.
I remember once i got such Hilarious Report from russian roskomnadzor
I told them to Stop Ukraine war and then Well comply.
Yeah i understand that. I was mainly getting at DMCA being the wrong tool to begin with, even before getting into highly likely non-existent jurisdiction over OP or the provider.
It's not DMCA, I do not know where the OP took that it's in any way related to DMCA.
YT is a multinational company, which comes with the drawback of being able to be held accountable in various jurisdictions and on top of that is seriously trigger happy as YT isn't being paid to stick up for their users. Even just checking the claims reaching them would probably yield a net negative, so their usual course of action is to just delete the content and be done with it.
In general there is a lot of material floating around the internet, which is illegal in country X but won't be taken down because it's perfectly legal in country Y. Specific relations don't do much in that regard.
There's something he's not telling us or not telling us at all. I don't understand what this has to do with the DMCA.
People just assume takedown request = DMCA.
Edit: ah it was one of your team members who left by now. Sorry.
Common Maximilian W
Why on earth would a UK company comply with that?!
Yeah, my mistake. It wasn't a DMCA but a normal takedown request.
Sorry about that
Shame this was complied with. Does @NicholasOXI remove any content critical of Russia or Putin if they ask in a fancy way?
Yes, I am now on Avoro instead
RKN (abbreviation of Roskomnadzor) sends a takedown request to the responsible provider and requests them to take care of the issue. Sometimes, the request is related to a terrorist organisation, and sometimes it's related to terrorists. Sometimes it's an instruction to explain how you can do something illegal. Sometimes the request involves information that is prohibited in Russia. And sometimes it involves materials that are considered fake information.
In most cases, the provider requests their customers to remove the listed information or to make it unavailable to access from Russia. If the customer doesn't take action, then the provider has the right to request them to leave.
When the provider makes a decision, they need to understand that their service could be blocked in Russia if they don't act in time manner (usually 48-72 hours given).
Would be interesting to know if the statement with the upstream is just a lie or if there is really a upstream who would enforce something like this
It is not so important whether the information is true or false, it is more important that the provider decides to act as he did.
I don't necessarily see a DMCA complaint. What was the original complaint? It is true that the Russian government sends takedown notices and may choose to block an entire hosting company from their country if you don't comply. It has in fact occurred. It could simply be that they don't consider you valuable enough to lose a whole country's business. Which, personal feelings aside, I can at least understand.
Glad that you shared this. What a bunch of amateur clowns. I guess they suspend everyone on any DMCA they receive and don't have proper legal department to handle the cases.