Need help? Check out our Support site, then

Vridar Censored Redux

  1. Since my Vridar thread was unceremoniously and prematurely closed, I am reopening a new one. Please wordpress, play nice. According to the blog's (

    " I can assure everyone that I received absolutely no warning or take-down notice from either Joel Watts or WordPress prior to WordPress deactivating Vridar. None at all. I have asked WordPress to tell me when they sent me a warning notice and they do not reply. I have checked my spam email and there is nothing from either Joel or WordPress. Nothing.

    I did ask WordPress for a copy of the take-down notice I was supposed to have received and they did send me that — and I showed that in my alerts to other sites — but there was no header to indicate when it was supposedly sent or to what email address. They have not replied to my requests to tell me when they supposedly sent me that notice.

    I received no notice whatever. If Joel says he sent me email notices I ask him to show copies of the emails with send address and times.

    Neil Godfrey"

    So the responses to my original thread were not serious attempts to resolve this.

    1) Who says wordpress is interpreting the copyright infringement correctly?

    2) Since this is a grey area (what constitutes copyright infringement in this particular instance?), wouldn't it be more responsible to give Mr. Godfrey a means for remedying the alleged copyright infringement?

    3) If wordpress did send a notice to Mr. Godfrey, why can't it produce edocumentary evidence of that to present to Mr. Godfrey?

    4) Presumptiously declaring "well, if there is a copyright infringement, of course it was taken down" is a little like "well, if he wasn't guilty,the police officer wouldn't have arrested him." I think it is, frankly, un-American. ;-).

    The blog I need help with is

  2. As noted in the other thread - the blog owner and only the blog owner must work with the Terms of Service group over this matter, and nothing you do in the forum will change anything

  3. There has already been a thread closed on this topic
    This one will also be closed and presumably you have better things to do with your time than becoming a persona no grata here yammering away about a blog that you do not own when the blog owner refuses to contact Staff as directed.

    We are asked to refrain from discussing Terms of Service issues on these public forums. The blog owner has a warning notice with a link that works at all times (even when the regular contact form is closed). There’s also a contact form the blog owner can use to reach Terms of Service Staff at the bottom of this page

  4. timethief,

    thanks for not really paying attention. The blog owner has contacted wordpress (read post, please). I can send you some beginner's primers if you want.

    I didn't even mention terms of service, you did, as did auxclass.

    Repeat: Blog owner has contacted wordpress and received no reply. The blog owner received NO warning notice. That's the point.

    Now. Thank you for complicity with censorship. I will stay on the other side.

  5. Personally, I think how wordpress treats members should be an issue of interest and importance to other wordpress members. Especially when it comes to issues of censorship. If word gets out that wordpress treats members DIFFERENTLY based on CREED, I think that will create problems for them.

  6. I don't need a primer thanks. I'm a paralegal with a clear grasp of what copyright infringement is. I'm also long time internet user who knows a sabre rattler when when I meet one online, offline and in the court room.

    The blog owner received NO warning notice. That's the point.

    No one receives a warning notice and legally speaking ToS Staff does not have to justify their judgement call to the blog owner or anyone else. Any blog owner who feels the wrong call has been made can reach into their pocket and hire a lawyer and file a dispute claim.

    The owner can wait in line along with all the others who have suspended blogs until Staff get to him/her.

    Staff work their way through support tickets and forum threads tagged for their attention by dealing with those that have the earliest date and timestamps first, then moving forward to deal with those that have the most recent date and time stamps. Please be patient while waiting for Staff to assist the bloggers who posted before you did.

  7. NEVER sends a warning before responding to a copyright/takedown notice. They take the blog down. The behaviour you are describing is not only typical, it is mandated by law.

    Unless the owner of the blog contacts staff via the specific link I referred to in the other thread, nothing will happen. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. The blog will remain frozen. You may bloviate and express how offended you are all you want in the forum and NOTHING WILL EVER CHANGE.

  8. BTW if the blog owner wishes to retrieve any of their suspended blog content provided it has been indexed by Google then they can get it from Google's cache.

  9. Glad to hear you can read and understand, timethief, you hadn't previously given me reason to think so.

    Sabre-rattler? That term, which you have misused here, refers to making threats. I didn't make any threat. I brought an issue to the membership through the forum. If you had said "rabble-rouser," you would have been more accurate.

    "Any blog owner who feels the wrong call has been made can reach into their pocket and hire a lawyer and file a dispute claim."

    I see where your position on who should have access to freedom of expression lies. Good for you. Again, I am on the other side. Luckily, I think we could come up with some free legal assistance, however, the blog owner is a non-citizen.

    So, raincoaster and timethief, you are fine with a law that presumes guilt?

  10. The law mandates that WordPress.COM or ANY host must do certain things about a complaint - there is no wiggle room

    also WordPress.COM DOES NOT CENSOR - period end - a few months ago I think Russia took exception to a couple of Posts on a site here - Russia just did not like what was said - ask for the site to be removed or WordPress.COM would be blocked- WP.COM refused and WP.COM was blocked for some time from most of the former Soviet Union - the block was only removed when the blog owner took a couple of the Posts down - the blog owner's decision, not pressure from WP.COM

    China blocks most if not all of WP.COM because WP.COM refuses to censor blogs on content

    Blogs only go away based on legal Terms of Service reasons

  11. I am fine with failing to engage trolls. I assume the other Volunteers will now cease to pander to you by responding to you at all. Ta ta.

  12. Auxclass--you do understand that you are blindly and compliantly taking corporate side here, right?

    "The law mandates that WordPress.COM or ANY host must do certain things about a complaint - there is no wiggle room"

    Can you cite the law and case law on this?

    As far as I know, wordpress only is liable if they KNOW it is a copyright infringement, not if it is only alleged to be.

  13. My critics, might want to reflect on this:

    And then try to imagine a case in which a blogger:

    -criticizes the historical position of another blogger that was publicly posted

    -the post in question is on a non-commerical site, and the use of the information is for non-commercial purposes

    --factual, rather than a created piece of art (such as fiction)

    --there's no market question issue in sight here

    To me, it is hard to even begin to imagine a scenario short of completely ripping off the content (which wasn't the case since it quite clearly was a criticism of the work in question), that would constitute copyright infringement. In fact, it seems to fall in to categories that are more protected (such as criticism).

  14. What part of "this is making you look shrill, hysterical, and unable to follow basic instructions" are you having difficulty understanding?

    There is one contact link to use. If the blog owner has used any other one, he has screwed up. He must go back and use the correct contact link. That is the solution to get to the next step.

    This forum provides technical support solutions. It does not provide emotional support. You may have noticed, if you noticed nothing else.

  15. Which seems likely.

  16. Vridar's up elsewhere; off wordpress. Me, too. This customer: not satisfied, I'll take my considerable talents elsewhere. ;-)

  17. thanks for your help, raincoaster, you and timethief definitely helped make me feel like a welcome wordpress member. ;-).

  18. From

    The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has notable safe-harbor provisions which protect Internet service providers from the consequences of their users' actions (Similarly the EU directive on electronic commerce provides a similar provision of "mere conduit" which while not exactly the same, serves much the same function as the DMCA safe harbor in this instance). The US Patent and Trademark Briefing on ISP Liability states that in order to be eligible for safe harbor the ISP must have adopted and reasonably implemented a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network who are repeat infringers.

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic