3 ms·

> If they have to rely on the legal system to take things down, there is going to be a lot more nefarious activity that goes untouched. The DMCA does a reasona

> If they have to rely on the legal system to take things down, there is going to be a lot more nefarious activity that goes untouched. The DMCA does a reasonably good job of handling that exact problem for copyright infringing content, while still providing due process. Edit: I have no idea why this is being downvoted, what I’ve said is completely true. If you’re mad about YouTube’s terrible policies, they’re not related to DMCA. They have their own completely seperate (and highly oppressive) system for handling infringement claims (in addition to their DMCA obligations).

noodlesUK 7y ago
This DMCA? https://twitter.com/JRhodesPianist/status/1036929244654460928 https://twitter.com/JRhodesPianist/status/103692924465446092... https://www.eff.org/takedowns https://www.eff.org/takedowns The DMCA is fundamentally flawed and is a terrible model to base any future system on.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  The DMCA is fine. It’s everything services providers to in addition to DMCA that causes problems. The DMCA process is very simply: 1. You receive a takedown notice 2. If it’s not valid, you submit a declaration that it’s not 3. Your content is restored and the claimant now has to take you to court if they still think it’s infringing 4. If you lied on your counterclaim, your now also guilty of perjury The only thing it’s really missing is an imminent threat of perjury for frivolous claims (there also some obvious areas to make the process more efficient). But as far as a simple way of managing offending content, while still providing due process, the general format is quite good. It’s other unrelated policies that tend to get people the most riled up. https://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/universal-music-group-and-youtube-agree-to-forget-about-fair-use https://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/universal-music-group-a...
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    > 4. If you lied on your counterclaim, your now also guilty of perjury In theory, yes. In reality, no. "I was not aware to the best of my knowledge..." because the DMCA claimant never vetted things, they just employed a bot to spam claims all over the internet. It wasn't a "knowing" lie. So it's effectively without consequence or fall back. Hint: how many people have been charged with, let alone convicted of perjury in the history of the DMCA? Answer: None. Even in the small small small minority of counterclaims that have ended up in court, with the most egregious lack of standing, the worst that has happened is (and even this only in a single digit number of times) awarding of costs. Those are pretty good odds if you're a content creator (or copyright troll).
  - epicgiga 7y ago
    Copying is a fictional crime.

noodlesUK 7y ago

This DMCA? https://twitter.com/JRhodesPianist/status/1036929244654460928 https://twitter.com/JRhodesPianist/status/103692924465446092... https://www.eff.org/takedowns https://www.eff.org/takedowns The DMCA is fundamentally flawed and is a terrible model to base any future system on.

AmericanChopper 7y ago
The DMCA is fine. It’s everything services providers to in addition to DMCA that causes problems. The DMCA process is very simply: 1. You receive a takedown notice 2. If it’s not valid, you submit a declaration that it’s not 3. Your content is restored and the claimant now has to take you to court if they still think it’s infringing 4. If you lied on your counterclaim, your now also guilty of perjury The only thing it’s really missing is an imminent threat of perjury for frivolous claims (there also some obvious areas to make the process more efficient). But as far as a simple way of managing offending content, while still providing due process, the general format is quite good. It’s other unrelated policies that tend to get people the most riled up. https://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/universal-music-group-and-youtube-agree-to-forget-about-fair-use https://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/universal-music-group-a...
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  > 4. If you lied on your counterclaim, your now also guilty of perjury In theory, yes. In reality, no. "I was not aware to the best of my knowledge..." because the DMCA claimant never vetted things, they just employed a bot to spam claims all over the internet. It wasn't a "knowing" lie. So it's effectively without consequence or fall back. Hint: how many people have been charged with, let alone convicted of perjury in the history of the DMCA? Answer: None. Even in the small small small minority of counterclaims that have ended up in court, with the most egregious lack of standing, the worst that has happened is (and even this only in a single digit number of times) awarding of costs. Those are pretty good odds if you're a content creator (or copyright troll).
- epicgiga 7y ago
  Copying is a fictional crime.