3 ms·
FTA: Google Play team has responded to my appeal saying that they will not be reinstating the app and that I should address the complainant directly and resolve
by Someone 4y ago
FTA: Google Play team has responded to my appeal saying that they will not be reinstating the app and that I should address the complainant directly and resolve it with them, the complainant should allow Google Play team to reinstantiate the app.
I know it sucks, but I understand that decision completely. The DMCA was specifically created to safeguard web sites against copyright claims against content posted by users. If Google ignores a DMCA takedown, they become a party in a copyright infringement claim that’s, so far, is purely a case between Instagram (via the company they hired) and you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act#Title_II:_Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...:
“DMCA Title II, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act ("OCILLA"), creates a safe harbor for online service providers (OSPs, including ISPs) against copyright infringement liability, provided they meet specific requirements. OSPs must adhere to and qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block access to alleged infringing material (or remove such material from their systems) when they receive notification of an infringement claim from a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent (a "notice and takedown" process). OCILLA also includes a counternotification provision that offers OSPs a safe harbor from liability to their users when users claim that the material in question is not, in fact, infringing.”
- vorpalhex 4y agoPlease stop giving wrong legal advice. Google has a legal requirement to forward the DMCA claim. The recipient is allowed to counter claim at which point Google has done their job and is no longer liable, it goes to the courts. This is Google choosing to execute a takedown, which funny enough does expose them to some risk.
- Meph504 4y agoGoogle doesn't have a legal requirement to allow the app to exist in its market place. Google does have a legal requirement to comply in good faith to DMCA and copyright claims. It is really simple from a legal standpoint for google, which path to take. what "risk" are they exposing themselves too by not allowing this app again?
- lsaferite 4y ago> OCILLA also includes a counternotification provision that offers OSPs a safe harbor from liability to their users when users claim that the material in question is not, in fact, infringing. DMCA Counter Claim https://www.dmca.com/FAQ/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim https://www.dmca.com/FAQ/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim
- Meph504 4y agoYeah no doubt there are countless things that can be done, but all are initiated by the app dev, and none will probably compel Google do anything without a legal determination that the app isn't infringing. This system like in most cases is stacked against the little guy, he has an avenue but it's a long and possibly costly one.
- vorpalhex 4y agoGoogle only must comply with a non-contested DMCA notice. The moment it is contested, Google is done and has done their job. They are not the copyright arbiters - that would be the job of the court. By executing a takedown, Google is not acting under the DMCA. They are executing a takedown of an app that may or may not be infringing. They can absolutely be sued or taken to arbitration (ToS withstanding) with no DMCA protection.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bo1024 4y agoIf you read it, this case appears to have nothing to do with the DMCA. It's about trademarks. DMCA is not mentioned outside the title, possibly confusion by the OP.