Photo: Timothy Obare Rioba, the man alleged to behind the Kenya Daily Post
By:Â Chimwani Obiajulu for Ghafla.co.ke
And he asserted that the politician Wanjiru wa Chege the current sitting Murang’a Women’s Rep slept her way to the top and he also shocked us with news that Kenya’s Vice President William Samoei Ruto was having an affair with Senator Lesuuda.
All these were false allegations but no one cared to weigh them on the scale of truth. And the blogger behind them has been enjoying the comfort afforded him by the anonymity extended him by the internets. But no more.
Meet the man behind these sensational tall tales he is an alumni of K.U and while the same source claims that Kenya Post earns between 20,000-25,000Kshs a day that is highly suspect but what is a fact is that the blog appeals to low income earners and people not well educated according to alexa.com
Here is a legal complaint he was trying to lodge a complaint with google using DMCA (Digital Millenium Copy Right Act) to protect material on his site that he felt was being infringed upon by the site KENYAN2013.COM
Yet he is an avid copy paster of Ghafla.co.ke and Kenya-Today.com!
March 19, 2013
Timothy Obare Rioba
Sent by: [Private]
Google, Inc. [Blogger]
Mountain View, CA, 94043, US
Sent via: online form: Form
Re: Infringement Notification via Blogger Complaint
Google Form: copyright DMCA Complaint of alleged copyright infringement
1. Complainant’s Information
Company name: DAILY POST
Full legal name of the copyright holder: Timothy Obare Rioba
Country of residence: KE
2. Your copyrighted work
Location of copyrighted work (where your authorized work is located):
Description of the copyrighted work:
This is an example of copying and not attributing to the source.
The whole blogs are copy pasted from original content without changing a word.
3. Allegedly Infringing Material:
URL of the allegedly infringing material in our search results:
I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above as allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. [checked]
I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. [checked]
Signed on this date of:
And why was this so? Well:
Question: Why does a web host or blogging service provider get DMCA takedown notices?
Answer: Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(c)m a safe-harbor for hosts of “Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users.” This safe harbors give providers immunity from liability for users’ possible copyright infringement — if they “expeditiously” remove material when they get complaints. Whether or not the provider would have been liable for infringement by materials its users post, the provider can avoid the possibility of a lawsuit for money damages by following the DMCA’s takedown procedure when it gets a complaint. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous
Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions.
In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent’s name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)]
Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].
Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)?Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.
Section 512(d)(3), which applies to “information location tools” such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.
Question: Does a service provider have to follow the safe harbor procedures?Answer: No. An ISP may choose not to follow the DMCA takedown process, and do without the safe harbor. If it would not be liable under pre-DMCA copyright law (for example, because it is not contributorily or vicariously liable, or because there is no underlying copyright infringement), it can still raise those same defenses if it is sued.
Question: How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?Answer: If you believe your material was removed because of mistake or misidentification, you can file a “counter notification” asking the service provider to put it back up. Chilling Effects offers a form to build your own counter-notice.