4 ms·

This is why DMCA is broken. Too easy for false claims. It’s plagued the music industry, YouTube, and now free software.

_trampeltier 5y ago
I went to a store recently and asked why they haven't a product I ordered a time ago, listed on the website anymore. She said, she used pictures from the producing company. But now she got a letter, so she is now not anymore allowed to use the pictures. She can't make all pictures by herself because there are so many models and colors, so she just stop sell products from that brand complete. I didn't ask if it was really the company itself or just a lay firm.
- aurizon 5y ago
  Shoot in foot, nail to the floor, repeat on other foot. It is quite possible that a free lance copyright drone did this. The company would hardly do it to themselves = kill all sales as per example.
  - _trampeltier 5y ago
    I think about to write a mail to the company, because I would like to buy a product again and I also wonder about what they say about the story.
    - aurizon 5y ago
      Yes, it would be interesting. This copyright trolling based on false rights has become a growth industry. Almost all you tube creators have stories to tell about fake trolling DMCA demands. Every new you tube creator is assured of being trolled and unless they are able to get them to back down, the trolls grab the monetization revenue portion youtube grants. I had this happen to me. I made an original cat video and put it up, it was challenged by a troll, and I was unable to reach a human to redress matters, so I just removed it. I later found that someone had copied it and was monetising it for themselves. Since it was just a cute thing I did a few years ago and not my living income I too the fuckit POV and never bothered again.
      - gabereiser 5y ago
        >This copyright trolling based on false rights has become a growth industry Truer words have never been spoken right there. I feel like there’s an industry of folks that will perform DMCA takedowns on anyone’s behalf and they don’t care if they are correct or not. The onus is on the defendant. It’s sick.
        aurizon 5y ago
        Sad indeed, there is a huge problem lurking for youtube as this industry spreads and too many creators will get pissed off and move on they will have to find a way to factually deal with it or die a lingering death. The Chinese way has some merit. True verified name only and one account will cut out a lof of the anonymous arracks. Look at how many people get throwaway HN accounts...
amelius 5y ago
Why is it that as citizens we are powerless against such clearly broken laws as DMCA? Can't we do something about the situation, declare it unconstitutional or something?
- becquerel 5y ago
  Because the American citizenry has relatively little power over the actions of government in general. Thanks to a system of representative democracy, Americans can only really choose from a limited pool of politicians to influence the law-making process -- and there aren't any major politicians there which want to change copyright law (that I know of!). The main alternative to engaging in electoral politics are protests, demonstrations, general strikes, etc.
- wyldfire 5y ago
  > declare it unconstitutional or something? It's not obviously so - which articles/amendments do you think it violates? In any case, it's insufficient for us to declare it unconstitutional, that's for a judge to decide. In the absence of such a ruling, we can elect legislators to repeal it. But that seems terribly unlikely unless you can pose new legislation to take its place.
  - amelius 5y ago
    Isn't it against the principle of innocent unless proven guilty? Also this law circumvents the court of law, which sounds like it could be in violation of some more foundational laws such as the constitution. Finally the law puts control over free speech in the hands of corporations.
    - wyldfire 5y ago
      That principle of jurisprudence is for criminal matters. The DMCA issues at hand are for civil issues: providing relief to a copyright holder against a potential infringer. The DMCA shields a provider like ISPs/Dropbox/Google/etc and compels them to take down content that a copyright holder claims is infringing (or provide counter-notice). I'd suggest an improvement to the DMCA would be to hold copyright holders responsible for claims determined to be made in bad faith, or even just an "excessive" number of false claims.
rubyist5eva 5y ago
This isn't a DMCA notice.
- gabereiser 5y ago
  Hrm, it says so right on the notice... did you RTFA?

I went to a store recently and asked why they haven't a product I ordered a time ago, listed on the website anymore. She said, she used pictures from the producing company. But now she got a letter, so she is now not anymore allowed to use the pictures. She can't make all pictures by herself because there are so many models and colors, so she just stop sell products from that brand complete. I didn't ask if it was really the company itself or just a lay firm.

aurizon 5y ago
Shoot in foot, nail to the floor, repeat on other foot. It is quite possible that a free lance copyright drone did this. The company would hardly do it to themselves = kill all sales as per example.
- _trampeltier 5y ago
  I think about to write a mail to the company, because I would like to buy a product again and I also wonder about what they say about the story.
  - aurizon 5y ago
    Yes, it would be interesting. This copyright trolling based on false rights has become a growth industry. Almost all you tube creators have stories to tell about fake trolling DMCA demands. Every new you tube creator is assured of being trolled and unless they are able to get them to back down, the trolls grab the monetization revenue portion youtube grants. I had this happen to me. I made an original cat video and put it up, it was challenged by a troll, and I was unable to reach a human to redress matters, so I just removed it. I later found that someone had copied it and was monetising it for themselves. Since it was just a cute thing I did a few years ago and not my living income I too the fuckit POV and never bothered again.
    - gabereiser 5y ago
      >This copyright trolling based on false rights has become a growth industry Truer words have never been spoken right there. I feel like there’s an industry of folks that will perform DMCA takedowns on anyone’s behalf and they don’t care if they are correct or not. The onus is on the defendant. It’s sick.
      - aurizon 5y ago
        Sad indeed, there is a huge problem lurking for youtube as this industry spreads and too many creators will get pissed off and move on they will have to find a way to factually deal with it or die a lingering death. The Chinese way has some merit. True verified name only and one account will cut out a lof of the anonymous arracks. Look at how many people get throwaway HN accounts...

amelius 5y ago

Why is it that as citizens we are powerless against such clearly broken laws as DMCA? Can't we do something about the situation, declare it unconstitutional or something?

becquerel 5y ago
Because the American citizenry has relatively little power over the actions of government in general. Thanks to a system of representative democracy, Americans can only really choose from a limited pool of politicians to influence the law-making process -- and there aren't any major politicians there which want to change copyright law (that I know of!). The main alternative to engaging in electoral politics are protests, demonstrations, general strikes, etc.
wyldfire 5y ago
> declare it unconstitutional or something? It's not obviously so - which articles/amendments do you think it violates? In any case, it's insufficient for us to declare it unconstitutional, that's for a judge to decide. In the absence of such a ruling, we can elect legislators to repeal it. But that seems terribly unlikely unless you can pose new legislation to take its place.
- amelius 5y ago
  Isn't it against the principle of innocent unless proven guilty? Also this law circumvents the court of law, which sounds like it could be in violation of some more foundational laws such as the constitution. Finally the law puts control over free speech in the hands of corporations.
  - wyldfire 5y ago
    That principle of jurisprudence is for criminal matters. The DMCA issues at hand are for civil issues: providing relief to a copyright holder against a potential infringer. The DMCA shields a provider like ISPs/Dropbox/Google/etc and compels them to take down content that a copyright holder claims is infringing (or provide counter-notice). I'd suggest an improvement to the DMCA would be to hold copyright holders responsible for claims determined to be made in bad faith, or even just an "excessive" number of false claims.

rubyist5eva 5y ago

This isn't a DMCA notice.

gabereiser 5y ago
Hrm, it says so right on the notice... did you RTFA?