This is a copyright law invented in 1998 from the UN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_Treaty These things predictably always have ways for moneyed players to abuse them and for organizations to half commit. Even China signed up.
Copyright law existed long before 1998, so it's hardly something "invented in 1998 from the UN". There might be some aspects it standardized, but so far as I can tell I can't see how it's relevant to this particular case.
We’re discussing a post about DMCA in this thread which is a policy pushed by the UN and adopted by the US as DMCA. Not sure what your point is.
DMCA is one of the worst parts of the internet and for some reason capitalism is the boogieman in this thread. IP law has become hyper restrictive/excessive, with little oversight, and favours large companies with teams of lawyers.
>We’re discussing a post about DMCA in this thread which is a policy pushed by the UN and adopted by the US as DMCA. Not sure what your point is.
So far as I can tell there's nothing to do with takedowns? From wikipedia:
>The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a 1998 United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM). It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself
Capitalism is the boogieman because greasing the wheels to enact anti-consumer legislation is 100% in the spirit of modern capitalism.
Capitalism had moral authority from the invisible hand (with empirical support), but absent that, it's just another system of power, and clearly not a just one.
