3 ms·

I don’t know much about the intricacies of the DMCA process but my understanding is that the counter-notice will put the content back up unless the original fil

I don’t know much about the intricacies of the DMCA process but my understanding is that the counter-notice will put the content back up unless the original filer (in this case, Casio) provides proof they’ve filed suit. Is there anything stopping Casio from sending a strongly worded letter of their intent to file suit if the content isn’t removed? Is there anything stopping Casio from bringing suit, submitting the docket number to Github to have the content removed, and then withdrawing after 30 (or 60 or 90) days? Somewhat related, are there any transparency sites that track DMCA notices for which a counter-notice was filed and no suit was ever brought? To give the public an idea of which companies are most aggressively using takedown notices even where they might not feel they have much of a case.

ikeboy 6y ago
1. It's unethical to threaten to sue without an actual intention of suing - lawyers can be disciplined for that. 2. Once you sue, you can't dismiss unilaterally once the other side has responded. They can reasonably say "we put money into fighting this - you can't withdraw unless you do it with prejudice, which means you can't bring the same suit again." If there's a dismissal of any kind, that could be submitted to GitHub and they'd be permitted to reinstate the content, unless the court specifically said otherwise. The statute doesn't explicitly say this, but it talks about a lawsuit being filed to restrain infringement - it's obvious that if such a lawsuit is dismissed then that provision is no longer satisfied. I'm satisfied any judge looking at this would agree with my interpretation.