3 ms·
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 potenti
by 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.
- amelius 5y agoThanks for clearing that up. > 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. Yes, that would be a good idea. But it still leaves a bad taste, as it makes one wonder why we had to deal with the DMCA in its current form in the first place. Perhaps there should be a constitutional law which says that when it comes to things like entertainment and culture, then the benefit of the doubt should go to the people, not corporations. Imho, the US is taking the value of entertainment way too seriously.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago> 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. I'd suggest extreme penalties for false DMCA takedown requests. Seven figures minimum for the first offense.