Hacker News Reader

Comment by cdrxndr | Hacker News Reader

Was going to note the same thing. Pearson executed an appropriate request for taking down copyrighted material with all the rights for opposition that the DMCA enables.

The question, which the link-bait-y article didn't bother answering, is whether or not ServerBeach expressly outlined its response to DMCA takedowns beforehand. If not, they have more than a PR problem. If so, then not a very good idea to host a blog site (or any user-generated content site) with them ...

Also, at $75k/yr seems they're well beyond hosting and should be collocating their own hardware.

View on HN

It's so not link-baity, it's trying to change stuff for the better... I tried emailing them before, they palmed me off and ignored me to such an extent that we didn't have a choice... either go public about it or shuffle off and change hosts at great cost and pains to ourselves.

they could at least have called us!

I agree, ServerBeach screwed the pooch on this. But, the link-baity part is in pointing this out as a problem with the DMCA, when the actual problem is ServerBeach.

You do have backups, I hope? You can just be up and running on a new provider within a day or so?

Many and numerous backups, but moving ~2m blogs (there's at least 750k splogs that live in dbases but dont show on our numbers) 'aint that easy!

Just out of interest, but when is the acceptable answer to this question "No"?

I wasn't asking so that I could judge him; I was asking so that I could better understand his situation.

Sorry, I wasn't meaning to imply anything.

In the past I would always have said "You must have backups, always, no exceptions". But I realised when reading your post that there must be some businesses that don't have backups. Some of those have made a rational sensible decision. And I'm trying to work out where the cut off is between explaining to a customer that their data has gone and buying a bunch of drives for yet another rack.

No worries. In my experience, most businesses don't have backups, or adequate ones, usually because it's not a high enough priority (either because of funds or time) up until disaster hits.

I've mostly gotten over giving people grief for not having backups when fate finally catches up with them, so that's why I was asking.

I don't understand your last sentence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com