4 ms·

A company's "copyright usage terms" doesn't override law, so regardless of what are on those pages, the copyright owner can ignore it and take the proper, typic

A company's "copyright usage terms" doesn't override law, so regardless of what are on those pages, the copyright owner can ignore it and take the proper, typical legal path to protect their IP.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
Udemy’s copyright usage terms and reporting requirements are in compliance with DMCA safe harbor provisions (specifically Section 512, including “notice and takedown” procedures) thereby limiting their liability to copyright claims. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 Disclaimer: Not a lawyer. Not your lawyer.
- anonymous5133 9y ago
  Right which is why you start off by suing Udemy then you get your lawyer to give a legal demand to hand over the course uploader's information. Then you sue the uploader directly for piracy. They are not protected by DMCA. Then again the uploader is probably a professional pirate who has concealed his identity wisely or they are just a foreign person who isn't even located in the USA.
  - sundvor 9y ago
    Ironically: https://www.udemy.com/copyright-how-to-protect-your-work-from-piracy/ https://www.udemy.com/copyright-how-to-protect-your-work-fro...
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    It seems like the course of action you advocate for (suing the copyright infringer) has no chance of success if they are outside of the jurisdiction or it’ll be more expensive to litigate then a reward you could extract from them, so what would be the point? The end result is the same: as a copyright holder, you have no effective recourse beyond having your work removed from the platform.
- lozenge 9y ago
  > the material is transmitted through the system or network without modification of its content Udemy is watermarking the video, even though they know they frequently have pirated material. And although the DMCA allows infringing copyright to be kept behind paywalls, I think this may have been a mistake. A general paywall, like a newspaper preventing non subscribers from reading user comments, seems more reasonable than charging per specific infringing video.

A company's "copyright usage terms" doesn't override law, so regardless of what are on those pages, the copyright owner can ignore it and take the proper, typical legal path to protect their IP.

toomuchtodo 9y ago

Udemy’s copyright usage terms and reporting requirements are in compliance with DMCA safe harbor provisions (specifically Section 512, including “notice and takedown” procedures) thereby limiting their liability to copyright claims. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 Disclaimer: Not a lawyer. Not your lawyer.

anonymous5133 9y ago
Right which is why you start off by suing Udemy then you get your lawyer to give a legal demand to hand over the course uploader's information. Then you sue the uploader directly for piracy. They are not protected by DMCA. Then again the uploader is probably a professional pirate who has concealed his identity wisely or they are just a foreign person who isn't even located in the USA.
- sundvor 9y ago
  Ironically: https://www.udemy.com/copyright-how-to-protect-your-work-from-piracy/ https://www.udemy.com/copyright-how-to-protect-your-work-fro...
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  It seems like the course of action you advocate for (suing the copyright infringer) has no chance of success if they are outside of the jurisdiction or it’ll be more expensive to litigate then a reward you could extract from them, so what would be the point? The end result is the same: as a copyright holder, you have no effective recourse beyond having your work removed from the platform.
lozenge 9y ago
> the material is transmitted through the system or network without modification of its content Udemy is watermarking the video, even though they know they frequently have pirated material. And although the DMCA allows infringing copyright to be kept behind paywalls, I think this may have been a mistake. A general paywall, like a newspaper preventing non subscribers from reading user comments, seems more reasonable than charging per specific infringing video.