Yeah, I saw it the other day. I would bet a lot of money that the information was already stored. In fact, if their data group didn’t already store that information (link clicks to external websites) they should all be fired. This is just a way that you can find something that you’d previously looked at on facebook (which, oddly, may be the only site on the planet with a worse search function than reddit).
So, uh, yeah - fasten your seatbelt whenever you’re in the air.
Since even inadvertent or unintentional copying can be punished as infringement, any takedown should be subject to the same level of scrutiny and false claims should be awarded statutory damages matching infringement of registered works, collectible by the party who’s non-infringing work was blocked, but actionable by any party who is denied access. So if you can’t get to content due to DMCA you can sue, but you cannot recover damages or expenses - if you win, the $175k(?) per fraudulent take down is payable to the content owner. In that way, it’s recognized that an individual looking for content is injured by the takedown, but there is no financial incentive for take-down vigilantism.
Reminds me of one of my favorite ad campaigns
Humans are so massively susceptible to gamification. It’s nice for providing motivation, but it ends up being like an addiction the way companies leverage it.