Taringa! had a 27 million registered user base, according with Taringa's own metrics,[2] who create and share thousands of daily posts on general interest topics such as life hacks, tutorials, recipes, reviews, and art.
The platform had a presence in every country in the Spanish-speaking world – its main markets were Argentina, Spain, Colombia, and Chile. According to comScore statistics in 2013,[3] it was the fourth most popular Latin American Social Network and the second one in traffic only after Facebook,[4] since then the site's traffic has dramatically declined, dropping up to the 3898th place in the Alexa Ranking on December 30, 2020.[5]
History
Taringa was created in 2004 by Fernando Sanz (Cypher). The initial version of the website could not sustain its rapid growth and was quickly sold to Alberto Nakayama and the Botbol brothers, Matías and Hernán.[6]
In February 2012, an article by Wired listed Taringa! as one of the foreign sites that "outshine Facebook", stating "there are still places where an also-ran or a homegrown alternative beats out the global hegemonies".[7]
In September 2017, Taringa! suffered a database breach when almost 28 million database entries were leaked.[8]
In 2019, it was acquired by blockchain company IOV Labs.[9]
The website announced on March 11, 2024 that it would shut down from March 24, due to changing trends in social media platforms and the difficulty of monetizing in such an environment.[10] Much of the user base had migrated to Reddit.[6]
Structure
Posts
One of Taringa!'s most important aspects is the posts. The users create the content themselves and receive feedback from the community (except new users, being experts or not) in the form of comments, points, recommendations, and favorites. Top-rated content gets featured on a special section of the site called Tops. Posts can be about many different subjects. They can be created with text, images, gifs, videos, and/or links. Within the post section of the website there are a variety of categories, including art, travel, news, computers and technology, etc.[citation needed]
Home page
Historically, Taringa's home page had a main section of posts which were organized in chronological order, according to the most recent posts, as well secondary sections with top posts (the most voted by the community by week, month or year) and post highlights (selected using a number of different variables such as visits, comments, favorites, etc.).
In June 2014, Taringa! updated its homepage, making not only aesthetic changes but also by developing a new algorithm in order to highlight the best contributions made by the community. By the use of geo-tracking, each country can have its own personalized homepage, according to the most relevant local issues going on at the time. Currently, posts created by users can be seen on the homepage and are ordered in three main sections: biggest highlights, emerging, or the most recent:
Highlights: posts which continue to be the most commented on, most read, most recommended and which maintain the highest score, over an extended period of time (by week).
Emerging: posts that have started to gain momentum; they have received a lot of points, visits, comments or recommendations by the community in just a short period of time. These are subjects that start to become “hot-topics” on the website.
Most recent: Posts in chronological order of their creation continue to remain on the homepage but maintain relative prominence.
Communities
Taringa! has a system of user-created groups that are called "Communities." Communities are the space on Taringa! where users can interact and discourse with other users. There are many different categories within Communities, and within each category are a variety of subcategories. These groups are used to share interests, information, ideas, creative content, and others. When you create a Community, you are the owner and the moderator of that Community. There are more than 80.000 communities created by users in very different kinds of subjects, from Android followers to guitar player community.
My Taringa!
This section of the site was released with Taringa! v5. In this section users can post quick messages, images, videos, and links. These messages are called "shouts". A user can view all of the shouts and activity from all the users he/she follows in My Taringa!
User ranks
In the Taringa! V5, the owners released a function called “Karma”. This is what determines your user rank.
Troll: karma −1
Flamer: karma 0
Inexperto (Untrained): karma 1
Iniciado (Beginner): karma 2
Aprendiz (Novice): karma 3
Amateur: karma 4
Regular (Medium): karma 5
Experto (Expert): karma 6
Avanzado (Advanced): karma 7
Elite: karma 8
Silver: karma 9
Gold: karma 10
Platinum: karma 11
Diamond: karma 12
Internet regulation problems
Legal issues
According to the protocol of Taringa!, users are only allowed to post links to original content created by the user, or other contents that don't infringe copyright laws. For example, scanned photographs that are already in the public domain, a linux tutorial, or articles written by the user themselves are allowed, but uploading a copyrighted movie is not allowed.[11] When there are links that infringe copyright laws, they must be removed by the administrators and moderators of the page according to Taringa!'s own protocol.[12]
The owners of Taringa! alleged that the website worked as an interchange site, so it did not host any file, but at the same time users sometimes posted links that violated copyright. There were also posts with content that had been extracted from other websites or personal blogs, although Taringa! required that every post mention its sources. Moreover, the owners remarked that Taringa! only showed links to content, and that anyone could search for specific content like music or software, in the same way that those links could be searched on Google or Yahoo.
"Sometimes people say that Taringa is a pirate website, but that is not true: In fact, there are people that post pirate content through Taringa. For instance, if I would search only pornography content on Google, then I could state that Google is a porno site. But Google is much more than porno. That is like the Internet works already, in the Net all contents are related, we did not invent this. Therefore, if we closed Taringa, its contents would not disappear, they could be found to download on other websites. We are not responsible for the contents posted by users"
"Sites like Taringa work neither as discussion forums nor as sites that simply search for contents on the web. Taringa mainly shows posts that include links to contents hosted in other servers and at the same time, this website has a search engine that allows users to find the links of the contents required. Most of those links are protected by copyright and posted or distributed without permission from the authors. Taringa works under the Argentine Law system, and Law protects the copyrighted works like books, music or software, emphasizing the absolute prohibition to reproduce all those contents if the authors have not given their approval previously. Therefore, if Taringa allows users to access to copyrighted material causing that any person may reproduce illegal work, the owners of Taringa are clearly breaking the law and they could be taken to a Court. Taringa should redefine its website in order to the large community of users be able only to share contents previously authorized by their respective owners"
In May 2011, the owners of Taringa (brothers Hernán and Matías Botbol) were accused of enabling copyright infringement and sentenced to pay $200,000 (US$20,000). The Botbol brothers were also prosecuted for infringing article 72 of Law 11.723, which regulates copyright in Argentina. Said article states that "any person who edits, sells or publishes a copyrighted work without permission from its authors will be sentenced to spend a period of one month to six years in jail".[15][16]
The Botbol brothers were summoned to delete the posts containing copyrighted material, under threat of arrest for failing to comply. The owners of Taringa! alleged that they cannot determine if the material uploaded by users was breaking copyright rules, due to the fact that Taringa! had an average of 20,000 posts a day. They also stated that they were not able to access the Intellectual Property Office ("Registro Nacional de la Propiedad Intelectual", in Argentina) to know which works are under protection of copyright rules.[15]
Additionally, the accused said that on March 23, 2009 all disputed material had been deleted from the website, but "other users uploaded it again on June 19, 2009".[15]
Nevertheless, the court considered that the owners of Taringa! were conscious about the infringements committed and that in spite of deleting illegal content, they allowed forbidden material to remain on the website without being removed.[15]
In October, 2011, The National Court of Appeals (Cámara Nacional de Apelaciones en lo Criminal y Correccional) also prosecuted Alberto Nakayama, finding him responsible for publishing links that allowed users to download books without permission from their authors. The court also unveiled three precedent rulings that seized Nakayama's assets for $100,000, $200,000 and $300,000 respectively.
The court, formed by Judges Marcelo Lucini and Mario Filozof, described that the prosecuted, as owners of Wiroo S.R.L., subscribed the hosting services of Taringa! offering users "the possibility of sharing and downloading material with no permission from the authors for its publication on the website. Therefore, they helped users to spread the illegal reproduction of the material published".
On the other side, Taringa! published on its website the same note that had been posted in May, 2011, when the prosecution of Botbol Brothers was confirmed. Once again the owners of Taringa! stated they had not committed any offense. They alleged that the works which they were prosecuted for "were not hosted on Taringa!, but in RapidShare, whose servers are located outside of Argentina", so Argentine law should not apply to the issue.
The resolution stated that Nakayama "is the owner (along Matías and Hernán Botbol) of the site www.taringa.net, and all of them allowed material whose reproduction had not been authorized by its authors to be published on the webpage; although the publications redirected to other Internet site, it could not have been possible unless it was done through Taringa". "It was demonstrated that works were illegally reproduced uploading them to a webpage without being authorized by their creators", said the ruling.[17]
In January 2012 Taringa! was included by the FBI as one of the websites investigated for copyright infringement and other cybercrimes, as stated in a written report that was part of the prosecution against Megaupload.[18]
In May, 2012, it was announced that the owners of Taringa! (Matías and Hernán Botbol and Alberto Nakayama) would be judged under the charge of infringing copyright law in Argentina. They had been prosecuted for allowing the download of copyrighted legal and computer books through Taringa! website.[19] Article 72 of Argentine copyright Law (which the owners of Taringa! are accused to infringe) punishes with imprisonment from a minimum of one month to a maximum of six years.[20][21] The trial was finally confirmed in September 2012, being the first time that the responsibility of websites for the illegal downloads made by their users will be discussed through oral proceedings in Argentina.[22]
On October 4, 2012, by deciding to drop the appeal, the site Administrators forced the Federal VI Appealing Chamber to give the handling the case back to First Instance so that this would order Court N° 26.17 to proceed with the trial.[23]
Taringa's approach and solution
In December 2012, the website announced an upgraded system to report content susceptible to copyright infringement. Taringa! uses the "notice and takedown" method which is based on a North American model of Intellectual Property management on the internet, known as Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Those procedures were made with the purpose of reaching an agreement with the "Cámara Argentina del Libro" (CAL), the body that regulates book copyright in Argentina.[24]
Finally, in 2013, after having established channels of communication with the owners of Taringa!, the main plaintiffs in the case decided to desist from continuing the lawsuit.[25] In April that same year, Taringa! signed an agreement with some leading intellectual property organizations to make a joint effort to "democratise the circulation of culture commodities online."... "The agreement with Taringa "opened a new phase of development as far as copyright laws are concerned" as it was said after the meeting.[26]
Other cases
In May 2015, Taringa! was dismissed from a complaint presented by Jorge Luis Borges's widow, María Kodama,[27] the widow and sole heir of the rights of writer Jorge Luis Borges, for the alleged theft of intellectual property. The ruling established that internet companies cannot be held liable a priori for content shared by users across platforms and that there was no malicious intentions on the part of Taringa!.
Throughout April 2014, Kodama reported various websites which allegedly facilitated or reproduced unauthorized texts by Jorge Luis Borges on the internet. Finally, the courts made their settlement in line with the jurisprudence of recent cases in Argentina – p.e "Belén Rodriguez and Google" – making the legal accountability of internet intermediaries subjective.
According to this position, internet intermediary companies can only be considered accountable for any illegal content uploaded by users through their platforms once they are duly notified by the affected owner of a breach of law, and only if, once notified they do not proceed quickly and diligently in order to remove the content and stop infringement.[28]
Social impact
In 2010, an Argentine user of the site built a bass guitar that he could gift to Paul McCartney when he visited Argentina for a series of concerts.[29]
In 2012 Taringa! launched "T! Solidaridad", a branch of Taringa! dedicated to community service and corporate responsibility. Taringa! users promote charitable causes by raising awareness about donating and volunteering. Users can take action by posting in the category called "Solidaridad", which allows users to post requests and proposals for social action that will help people and animals in need. T! Solidaridad also contributes to these causes by collecting items for the homeless and children's organizations, as well as organizing blood drives and animal shelters.
Taringa! also published a book in July 2009. This consisted of a compilation of the most valued posts (according to the opinion of users) in the history of the site. The income derived from the book sales were donated to NGO "Un Techo para mi País" ("A Home for my Country").[30]
Security
The site suffered a major security breach and according to an official report, the data of 28 million users was leaked.
"On the day we suffered an external attack that compromised the security of our databases and the Taringa! Code," the social network reported in a post. "No phone numbers or access credentials of other social networks have been compromised, as well as addresses of bitcoin wallets from the Taringa! Creators program. But we forced a password reset for all potentially affected users," the statement continued.[8]
Related Research Articles
Warez is a common computing and broader cultural term referring to pirated software that is distributed via the Internet. Warez is used most commonly as a noun, a plural form of ware, and is intended to be pronounced like the word wares. The circumvention of copy protection (cracking) is an essential step in generating warez, and based on this common mechanism, the software-focused definition has been extended to include other copyright-protected materials, including movies and games. The global array of warez groups has been referred to as "The Scene", deriving from its earlier description as "the warez scene". Distribution and trade of copyrighted works without payment of fees or royalties generally violates national and international copyright laws and agreements. The term warez covers supported as well as unsupported (abandonware) items, and legal prohibitions governing creation and distribution of warez cover both profit-driven and "enthusiast" generators and distributors of such items.
In the context of the World Wide Web, deep linking is the use of a hyperlink that links to a specific, generally searchable or indexed, piece of web content on a website, rather than the website's home page. The URL contains all the information needed to point to a particular item. Deep linking is different from mobile deep linking, which refers to directly linking to in-app content using a non-HTTP URI.
Inline linking is the use of a linked object, often an image, on one site by a web page belonging to a second site. One site is said to have an inline link to the other site where the object is located.
In computer networks, download means to receive data from a remote system, typically a server such as a web server, an FTP server, an email server, or other similar systems. This contrasts with uploading, where data is sent to a remote server.
isoHunt was an online torrent files index and repository, where visitors could browse, search, download or upload torrents of various digital content of mostly entertainment nature. The website was taken down in October 2013 as a result of a legal action from the MPAA; by the end of October 2013 however, two sites with content presumably mirrored from isohunt.com were reported in media. One of them – isohunt.to – became a de facto replacement of the original site. It is not associated in any way with the old staff or owners of the site, and is to be understood as a separate continuation.
Megaupload Ltd was a Hong Kong–based online company established in 2005 that operated from 2005 to 2012 providing online services related to file storage and viewing.
Peekvid.com was a website that cataloged links to various TV shows and movies to make them more easily accessible to the public.
TinyPic was a photo- and video-sharing service owned and operated by Photobucket.com that allowed users to upload, link, and share images and videos on the Internet. The idea was similar to URL shortening, in that each uploaded image was given a relatively short internet address. An account was not required to use TinyPic.
The use of the BitTorrent protocol for the unauthorized sharing of copyrighted content generated a variety of novel legal issues. While the technology and related platforms are legal in many jurisdictions, law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies are attempting to address this avenue of copyright infringement. Notably, the use of BitTorrent in connection with copyrighted material may make the issuers of the BitTorrent file, link or metadata liable as an infringing party under some copyright laws. Similarly, the use of BitTorrent to procure illegal materials could potentially create liability for end users as an accomplice.
TV Links was a user contributed online video directory for television programmes, films, and music videos. In a similar style to BitTorrent trackers such as The Pirate Bay, video content was not hosted by TV Links. Instead, videos were hosted by third-party video sharing websites. The website was operated as a hobby by David Rock of Cheltenham, England.
The Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) is United States federal law that creates a conditional 'safe harbor' for online service providers (OSP), a group which includes Internet service providers (ISP) and other Internet intermediaries, by shielding them for their own acts of direct copyright infringement as well as shielding them from potential secondary liability for the infringing acts of others. OCILLA was passed as a part of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and is sometimes referred to as the "Safe Harbor" provision or as "DMCA 512" because it added Section 512 to Title 17 of the United States Code. By exempting Internet intermediaries from copyright infringement liability provided they follow certain rules, OCILLA attempts to strike a balance between the competing interests of copyright owners and digital users.
Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright without permission for a usage where such permission is required, thereby infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement.
Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., 676 F.3d 19, was a United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision regarding liability for copyright infringement committed by the users of an online video hosting platform.
Flava Works, Inc v. Gunter, 689 F.3d 754, is a decision by the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, authored by Judge Richard Posner, which held that Marques Gunter, the sole proprietor of the site myVidster.com, a social bookmarking website that enables its users to share videos posted elsewhere online through embedded frames, was not liable for its users' sharing and embedding of copyrighted videos. The court of appeals reversed the decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, which had granted a preliminary injunction against myVidster, citing sufficient knowledge of infringement on Gunter's part, while denying safe harbor defense under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The Court held that Gunter was not directly liable because the copyrighted content was not stored on myVidster's servers, and was not contributorily liable because there was no evidence that conduct by myVidster increased the amount of infringement.
Cuevana was an Argentine file sharing website that offers movies and television content in their original languages, with Spanish subtitles. The site was created in October 2009 and as of 2011 was one of the 20 most visited websites in Argentina with half a million visits daily.
Multiple criminal indictments and enforcement actions were taken against Megaupload owner Kim Dotcom in various jurisdictions. On 19 January 2012 the United States Department of Justice seized and shut down the file-hosting site Megaupload.com and commenced criminal cases against its owners and others. On 20 January 2012 Hong Kong Customs froze more than 300 million Hong Kong dollars in assets belonging to the company.
Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, LLC, 972 F. Supp. 2d 500, 972 F. Supp. 2d 537, was a 2013 copyright infringement case out of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The decision resolved cross-motions for summary judgment filed by a video-sharing service (Vimeo) and a pair of record labels. Vimeo sought a ruling that, as a matter of law, it was entitled to safe harbor protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) as to a series of copyrighted videos that were uploaded to its platform; the record labels sought the opposite ruling.
Hernán Botbol is an Argentine tech entrepreneur who has created several successful businesses. Currently, he's running Apply Ai Corporation from Austin, Texas.
YouTube copyright issues relate to how the Google-owned site implements its protection methods. The systems are designed to protect the exclusivity of a given creator and owner and the rights to reproduce their work. YouTube uses automated measures such as copyright strikes, Content ID and Copyright Verification Program. These methods have been criticized for favoring corporations and their use of copyright claims to limit usage of uploaded content.
SeriesYonkis is a case in Spanish criminal law. The four former website operators of the site SeriesYonkis, and the sister sites PeliculasYonkis and VideosYonkis, were charged with copyright infringement due to the provision of hyperlinks to cyberlockers where users could access TV series and movies. The defendants faced up to 4 years in prison and over 550 million euros in damages. The case called into question whether the activity of the webmasters constituted an act of communication to the public, following the requirement of the Spanish Criminal Code within the meaning of the Information Society Directive.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
