3 ms·
I think your suggestions focus too much on monetary repercussions. For businesses this turns into a continuous cost benefit analysis, and the larger the busines
by tomxor 6y ago
I think your suggestions focus too much on monetary repercussions. For businesses this turns into a continuous cost benefit analysis, and the larger the business the larger potential benefit of abusing DMCA claims - it's possible to attempt to balance this with charges relative to the size of the business, but this is still just dancing around a threshold.
I think more rights should be on the line, this is more of a qualitative loss on both sides of the equation which is harder to weight in terms of cost benefit... if you abuse rights, you should loose rights, and that goes for business entities too, the larger the company the more to lose, but the more resources they have, so it forces them to be accurate.Your #3rd suggestion is such a right, but doesn't cut it for this example of abuse where the "copyright holder" doesn't hold any relevant copyright... to cover these cases where DMCA is completely inapplicable we need loss of rights at the individual and entity level rather than works, e.g:
1. Risk of loss of the right for the _business_ entity to make _any_ future DMCA complaints against the defendant.
i.e The defendant would be legally allowed to infringe on the businesses copyrighted works in _future_ if they desired. This is a really good deterrent of missuse because it causes claims to cut both ways - you don't need money and lawyers to make things backfire, it's automatic.
2. Loss of right to the individual making the complaint.
Individuals submitting these complaints should take some degree of responsibility, if they are knowingly perjuring themselves then they should lose their personal rights to submit DMCAs for any business - this pushes them back towards individualized thinking rather than hiding behind the demands of their superiors.
To simply enforce either of these without some kind of centralised bar, once an entity has been banned a second strike could automatically become a criminal act.