It's unreasonable to expect cloudflare etc to be able to proactively identify legal vs illegal streams. The companies who own the copyrights can't even get that right much less a third party that has no idea if a stream is licensed.

▲

jeppester 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Why though? Why is it unreasonable to expect a company to have some level of responsibility for serving clients that are using their platform for illegal activity?

It the same thing with social media and moderation. We don't have to let them off the hook just because doing the right thing would make them unprofitable.

▲

dminik 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, how do we qualify which companies get punished for which crimes?

Do we punish gun manufacturers for someone being shot? Kitchen utensil companies for someone being stabbed? Car manufacturers for car crashes? Road construction companies for human trafficking?

How deep does this go? Is a steel foundry responsible for the stabbing? Is a camera lens manufacturer responsible for illegal porn?

	▲	jeppester 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That is something we'll need to figure out. Just because it requires some work to figure out where to draw the line, it doesn't make it wrong to draw one. Banks are generally required to check that their customers are not laundering money. In a lot of countries it's illegal to buy or sell goods that you know are very likely stolen. It don't think it's outrageous to expect more action from Cloudflare when they must know that their service is used for protecting criminal sites. Relatedly I'd want the betting companies whose ads are shown on these illegal pages to have some amount of responsibility for where their ads are shown, and the same goes for well-renowned websites that show clearly deceiving ads.

▲

dwedge 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Who said proactively?

▲

rtkwe 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Any action by cloudflare before a court order or notice would be proactive. There's no way to effectively block streamers of live shows because they can create new sites or accounts for each event and by the time they're found, reported and cloudflare reasonably reviews and acts on them the event will be long over.

What do you expect cloudflare to actually do about these streams?

▲

rvnx 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A report content form, like DMCA, with support people behind processing the tickets. It already exists.

When there is phishing or pedo content, you think they wait for court order or react to abuse ?

They are distributing content through their servers, not just displaying it.

Every hosting and CDN companies has abuse department, it's a normal part of the process. Here, Cloudflare is aware, and chooses to ignore the abuse requests, then they have to take their responsibilities.

Cloudflare is a US-based company so they are realistically out of reach, or too late.

If there are abuse requests, and Cloudflare wants to comply but not block the website, they can downgrade to DNS only, and then the host IP would be blocked.

If Cloudflare doesn't comply and intentionally keeps distributing content -> block Cloudflare.

At some point for them, the cost of complying with the law will be cheaper than handling the complaints that they are blocked.

It's like YouTube, they shutdown content on request of rights holders.

	▲	otherme123 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Afaik, Cloudflare are asked to block an IP, to which they answer that is not a valid IP, but a shared one, please be more precise. Being more precise takes effort and time, so they opted to ban the IP at ISP level, and they don't have to ask anyone.

▲

dwedge 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> or notice

Maybe I'm being optimistic but I'm assuming the first action wasn't large scale IP blocks. Cloudflare likely didn't take action.

> What do you expect cloudflare to actually do about these streams?

I'm sorry but I'm not buying that the market leader in bot detection can't detect sport suddenly being streamed to an influx of people from a new IP at kick off. If this was the US banning them, I'm sure they'd have found a way around it by now

	▲	rtkwe 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Even if they could detect that that'd require peeking into every bit that passes through their service(s) looking for offending content AND require knowing it's not a licensed stream. The latter is own can of worms, they can't know if any particular piece of data is properly licensed or not. Bot detection is relatively easy in comparison, the distinction between licensed and illegal streams is 100% vibes from cloudflare's available data.

▲

charcircuit 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Cloudflare can assign IPs based off customer reputation. High risk customers get high risk IPs. This way legitimate businesses stay on IPs that don't get blacklisted and sketchier businesses go on high risk IPs before they potentially get banned.

	▲	dbbk 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		They already do this. Free tier IPs are separate from Pro tier, Enterprise tier, etc.