4 ms·

In general it seems Google honors all DMCA requests immediately, and only rejects them after they're able to review it. Wonder if this could be used maliciousl

• olliej 5y ago
  They’re required to. The DMCA safe harbor provisions require claims to be taken as true by default, and then if the victim responds with “this is false” the original claimant has two weeks (iirc) to respond, during which the recipient is meant to keep the content unavailable.
  • thayne 5y ago
    In other words, guilty until proven innocent.
  • wmf 5y ago
    Doesn't the DMCA allow hosting providers a reasonable time (e.g. 24 hours) to respond to takedowns?
    • Quekid5 5y ago
      Possible, but if you're running a fully automated company... what difference would that make? If anything it'd be a liability... a risk of your "cron job" being a bit late or something.
      • wmf 5y ago
        Delaying the takedown by 23 hours or so could prevent this exact kind of screwup.
        • olliej 5y ago
          Alas it wouldn’t in the case that it doesn’t get press. Because the person who made the original claim has like two weeks to respond and the content can’t be returned until they respond or two weeks is up
  • schoen 5y ago
    My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. I don't know how to substantiate that recollection, though, and even if that's right, it would definitely be a heightened risk for the service provider to choose to take on.
    • magicalist 5y ago
      > My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. This is another way of saying if you don't follow the DMCA you become liable for the infringing content (if the content owner sues and is successful, of course), which is indeed what the DMCA says :)
      • schoen 5y ago
        But another intuition or worry people might have is that they will completely lose the safe harbor for all of their activities if they refuse to honor any takedown. I can see why people would have that fear, but I don't think it's right.
        • KarlKemp 5y ago
          It’s also not real. This is civil law. One claimant has nothing to do with the other.
          • schoen 5y ago
            If you look at how it's described in, say, https://www.copyright.gov/512/ https://www.copyright.gov/512/ there's a fair amount of ambiguity because they're talking about the ability to qualify for safe harbors in general, presumably mixed together with the ability to qualify in a specific case, without drawing that distinction explicitly.
  • bawolff 5y ago
    I think you're allowed to ignore requests if they are obviously false or missing required info. I know wikipedia ignores 75% of the dmca notices they get (source: https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/transparency/2021-2/dmca-takedown-notices/ https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/transparency/2021-2/dm... )
• wmf 5y ago
  Such a takedown would be reviewed and reversed within minutes, of course.
  • ziml77 5y ago
    DMCA complaints against Google's own property are sure to get special review. They're not involved as just an index or host, you're directly accusing them of copyright infringement.
    • trulyme 5y ago
      Yes, that is the reason for the special review, and not that it hurts them instead of a 3rd party. (/s, in case it isn't obvious)