3 ms·
I think I agree. The DMCA requires you to attest that you have "a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by th
by geofft 8y ago
I think I agree. The DMCA requires you to attest that you have "a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law." As far as I know, there is no successful caselaw of accusing a takedown sender of acting in bad faith—even when using automated systems like Content ID. (Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. is the closest but there wasn't any actual consequence for Universal, I think.)
The other problem is that the DMCA safe harbor provision does not (AIUI) prevent companies from being stricter than necessary, and things like Content ID filter posts even before the level of a DMCA action. If YouTube "forgets" to update Content ID to change < 1923 to < 1924, I believe there's no legal recourse for an uploader to force them to do so.
(IANAL and I haven't closely kept up with this so pleaee correct me if I'm wrong!)
- comex 8y agoLenz v. Universal was ultimately settled under confidential terms. Since the preceding judgement in the 9th Circuit was largely favorable to Lenz, I’d guess those terms probably did include Universal paying at least some trivial amount.
- anticensor 8y ago> YouTube "forgets" to update Content ID to change < 1923 to < 1924 This will not affect ContentID as even public domain content is identified.