Now I have lost three servers to bogus DMCA takedown requests simply for running a passive Tor relay.
Are D.O.'s staff so anti-privacy and anti-anonymity that they choose to do this? Makes me wonder how "secure" the servers are in their data centers.
Do you have proof those DMCA takedown requests were bogus because you'd need some evidence to prove that. anti-privacy or anti-anonymity has nothing to do with security to their datacenter or racks. This is just terms they have to stick to. They don't want you abusing the bandwidth limits and if done so they will remove your server without warning.
What evidence would be sufficient? A complete file listing of the server's attached storage?
Or maybe... they're just monitoring your traffic, those DMCA takedowns may of been legitimate and which DO would of had to comply by.
How might they monitor the encrypted Tor traffic? I am running a Tor Exit node, and the services have been shut off without warning, or substantial proof that I am infringing copyright.
I assert that running a Tor Exit node does not imply copyright infringement. This is simply because I am unable to break the encryption and choose which packets to allow through, and which packets to drop.
Further, I am offering complete file listings, network traffic logs, et al., but apparently they go by the mantra 'guilty until proven innocent.' I am offering proof of the innocence, regardless, but it appears that no amount of proof can satisfy the litigation hungry copyright companys (IP Echelon in particular).
If you're running an exit node and someone downloads pirated content through you, it looks like you're the one doing the pirating. If you ran a non-exit node Tor relay, then all traffic to and from you would indeed be encrypted and you wouldn't get DMCA notices.
Tor encryption only protects traffic within the Tor network, and when it exits your exit node, it is leaving Tor :-).
https://www.digitalocean.com/help/policy/ --> "What is your policy on TOR?"