2 ms·

DMCA 512(f) provides a penalty for misrepresentation; however, it is quite difficult to actually prove such things unless the plaintiff is very, very stupid (in

DMCA 512(f) provides a penalty for misrepresentation; however, it is quite difficult to actually prove such things unless the plaintiff is very, very stupid (in Latin: pro se) or obviously acting with malice. For example, if the thing you're taking down does use your content, but it falls under fair use, you can still get away with taking it down. There is no objective test for fair use and 512(f) does not mandate one; the criteria is just that you merely considered fair use. And since fair use is a bottomless pit of grey areas, you basically can't get a 512(f) ruling out of a legitimate copyright owner. It only catches the kinds of people who, say, pretend they're Bungie so they can file DMCA takedowns Bungie can't retract in Bungie's name.

pbhjpbhj 5y ago
Well, quoting u/formerly_proven from a 5 month old thread that someone linked above: >Literally claiming copyright on this description for "find substring": "Given s and x, we want to know the zero-based index of the first occurrence of x in s" // This is a functional description which has very limited possible English language forms and so it's highly unlikely to qualify for copyright in the first place. Anyone who has enough knowledge to file a DMCA request that is looking at this would consider that it is at worst Fair Use but in all probability is not infringing. Seems a very strong case, if this quote is a true representation, for a claim of vexatious action.