4 ms·
Even simpler, require those filing a claim to put down a monetary deposit. If the accused disputes, they too file a deposit. The winner gets the money back and
by mabbo 6y ago
Even simpler, require those filing a claim to put down a monetary deposit. If the accused disputes, they too file a deposit.
The winner gets the money back and the platform gets to keep the losers deposit as a fee for having a trained, certified human make the decision.
Make the fees scale up with the number of claims by an accuser.
No one would file a frivolous claim. No one would dispute an obviously correct claim. The cost of having humans decide is covered, so platforms like Google have no excuse.
- swiley 6y agoThis is a fantastic idea, I'm sure there are issues with it but none are immediately obvious.
- olliej 6y agoIt means that people without spare cash completely lose the ability to appeal. I don’t know why a counterclaim should require a deposit - DMCA is already a guilty until proven innocent law, and merely counterclaiming doesn’t put your content back online.
- yccs27 6y agoThis seems like the perfect way to enable frivolous takedowns, because the accused might not be able to pay the deposit to dispute the claim. Additionally, small artists might similarly become unable to enforce their rights. (And if the deposit isn't too big, do you think a few dollars will deter billion-dollar companies?)
- mabbo 6y agoIs it worse than the existing system where there is no cost, and no way to fight back? I'm not arguing that it's a perfect system, but with a few adjustments I feel it's a much better one than exists today.
- alisonkisk 6y agoA counterclaim letter is the way to fight back. The law is fine. The enforcement is iffy.
- jedimastert 6y ago> If the accused disputes, they too file a deposit. If you can't afford to loss $100, you probably can't afford to temporarily not have it either.