Hacker News Reader

Comment by staunch | Hacker News Reader

I'd be worried about the liabilities in operating the service. It appears to be offering a legal service. What if someone gets involved in a big lawsuit and your system fails so they sue you for negligence? I'm not a lawyer so I can't imagine all the scary things, but it seems scary.

When you sell it I'd be sure to get the buyer to release you of any liabilities related to it.

View on HN

It is a legit non-repudiation service that is legally valid. It can be used in most countries court system and follows Berne Convention. I've got most of it covered in the FAQ and more information can be seen here: https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#...

Thanks for the advice thou.

Except that it's not legally valid in the U.S. or in Europe, where courts will not and cannot enforce a copyright which has not been registered with a recognized copyright authority (i.e., the U.S. copyright office or its equivalents in the European Union).

You are on the border line of committing fraud when you state that your are providing free copyright registration, because you are not. You are providing free third-party copyright registration, but that is not the same thing.

(IAAL, and I have done copyright litigation.)

Last I looked into it, it was valid in most European courts and the exception was U.K. and U.S. who have an extra layer of extortion above the Berne Convention which requires registration with their system in order to be accepted into the court. Spain, Italy and the others accept what MFC provides and is why there are a ton of services started in these countries like the following: http://www.dmca.com/ http://easytimestamping.com/ http://www.safecreative.org/ http://myows.com/ https://depotcode.com/

You're mistaking evidence of creation with the ability to enforce the copyright. The first goes to your ability to win your case, the second goes to your ability to even file the case in the first place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com