[adgar]

> Some level of proof is still necessary, though. Not just an accusation.

Is anyone arguing that mere accusations should result in kickstarter takedowns? You make a good point... just a sort of obvious one.

This is clearly a hard problem, and neither extreme of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" or "accusation = takedown" works. Maybe that's why this space is so unexplored! That doesn't absolve Kickstarter from having to discover the palatable middle ground.

Hard work is hard, and I think today's announcements are part of that hard work. So I say: keep it up, Kickstarter!

[anthonyb]

> Is anyone arguing that mere accusations should result in kickstarter takedowns?

Yes, it should - if it's backed by a legal letter, Kickstarter might be liable too, if the suit is sucessful.

[adgar]

You seem to have misunderstood "mere accusations."

Takedowns due to "mere accusations" to me means that I can fire off an e-mail if I see a kickstarter project that looks sketchy and have it taken down post-haste.

To me, that is highly suboptimal.

[anthonyb]

Well if it's based on this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4549792 then Kickstarter should take it down. It's a civil matter, so there's no "beyond reasonable doubt" required, and if Kickstarter are helping fund infringement, then they're on the hook too.

[alanctgardner2]

Is there actually a legal basis for this? As in, if Stripe was, in good faith, processing payments for a company which is selling (allegedly) infringing products, they're obligated to stop processing payments immediately? It seems like there'd be a clause in the TOS to indemnify them.

[makomk]

They didn't just take it down - they left no way for anyone to find out what had happened to the project by looking at the Kickstarter site. There's just a page saying the project doesn't exist anymore for some unspecified reason.