5 ms·

Has anyone claimed any success by going through the CCB, to fight these fraudulent takedowns? https://www.ccb.gov/ https://www.ccb.gov/

EarlKing 4y ago
Doesn't matter because... 1. The CCB is completely voluntary, so in most cases a determined troll in unlikely to submit to their jurisdiction. 2. In most cases when someone speaks of a DMCA takedown w/r/t Youtube there is no actual DMCA claim involved, but merely a claim made using the Content ID system, which does not involve making a formal complaint under the DMCA. 3. Fraudulent takedowns can subject you to claims for damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512, but of course that never happens because the only people targeted are those who don't have the ability to fight back.
smcin 4y ago
I seriously doubt it, because the CCB's About page (https://www.ccb.gov/about/ https://www.ccb.gov/about/) says: - participation is _voluntary_ for both claimant and respondent - monetary damages are capped at $15k per work, for a total of $30K for 2 works - bad-faith claimants may be ordered to pay the other party’s costs up to $5K/2.5K - there's a limit on the number of claims any party can file per year - CCB determinations are open to public view, but not precedential for court - parties cannot file the same claim in federal court if they went through the CCB process. (sounds like ADR) - it's designed to be navigable by non-lawyers and, instead of a judge and/or jury, the case is heard by a panel of three officers and the entire process is held online If you were a bad-faith claimant trying to intimidate under-funded good-faith users, or a copyright troll law-firm, those sound like _exactly_ the rules you'd want to avoid. Even simply the number of claims a claimant had filed, the identity and circumstances of the respondents (e.g. your own former business partners, film bloggers, rather than pirates or copycats) and the claims' success/failure rate would reveal abusive claimants (are there any statistics on DMCA abuse by claimants?) An 8/2022 article "The First 100 Cases at the Copyright Claims Board" https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2022/08/18/the-first-100-cases-at-the-copyright-claims-board/ https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2022/08/18/the-first-100-cas...
- smcin 4y ago
  There's an analysis at: https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/02/a-glimmer-of-hope-that-the-copyright-claims-board-ccb-wont-turn-into-a-troll-factory.htm https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/02/a-glimmer-of-h... > The cap likely will encourage aggressive copyright enforcers to stay in federal court and skip the CCB altogether... > Based on this analysis, the caps (10 proceedings/year for copyright owners or 40/yr for law firms) seem to deter many potential CCB users. If the plaintiffs’ lawyers aren’t steering clients towards it, and if both the firms and copyright owners see more value in consolidating cases in federal court, the CCB will most likely cater to the copyright owner who doesn’t have a lawyer and views an occasional small claims proceeding as its best hope; and possibly the rare circumstances where a CCB proceeding will be more lucrative than a federal court proceeding (like where the owner has an unregistered copyright and would prefer the statutory damages available only in the CCB). If these become the main CCB use cases, I imagine there will be dozens of CCB cases in a year, not thousands or even hundreds, and the CCB will not be an especially important adjudicatory venue.

EarlKing 4y ago

Doesn't matter because... 1. The CCB is completely voluntary, so in most cases a determined troll in unlikely to submit to their jurisdiction. 2. In most cases when someone speaks of a DMCA takedown w/r/t Youtube there is no actual DMCA claim involved, but merely a claim made using the Content ID system, which does not involve making a formal complaint under the DMCA. 3. Fraudulent takedowns can subject you to claims for damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512, but of course that never happens because the only people targeted are those who don't have the ability to fight back.

smcin 4y ago

I seriously doubt it, because the CCB's About page (https://www.ccb.gov/about/ https://www.ccb.gov/about/) says: - participation is _voluntary_ for both claimant and respondent - monetary damages are capped at $15k per work, for a total of $30K for 2 works - bad-faith claimants may be ordered to pay the other party’s costs up to $5K/2.5K - there's a limit on the number of claims any party can file per year - CCB determinations are open to public view, but not precedential for court - parties cannot file the same claim in federal court if they went through the CCB process. (sounds like ADR) - it's designed to be navigable by non-lawyers and, instead of a judge and/or jury, the case is heard by a panel of three officers and the entire process is held online If you were a bad-faith claimant trying to intimidate under-funded good-faith users, or a copyright troll law-firm, those sound like _exactly_ the rules you'd want to avoid. Even simply the number of claims a claimant had filed, the identity and circumstances of the respondents (e.g. your own former business partners, film bloggers, rather than pirates or copycats) and the claims' success/failure rate would reveal abusive claimants (are there any statistics on DMCA abuse by claimants?) An 8/2022 article "The First 100 Cases at the Copyright Claims Board" https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2022/08/18/the-first-100-cases-at-the-copyright-claims-board/ https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2022/08/18/the-first-100-cas...

smcin 4y ago
There's an analysis at: https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/02/a-glimmer-of-hope-that-the-copyright-claims-board-ccb-wont-turn-into-a-troll-factory.htm https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/02/a-glimmer-of-h... > The cap likely will encourage aggressive copyright enforcers to stay in federal court and skip the CCB altogether... > Based on this analysis, the caps (10 proceedings/year for copyright owners or 40/yr for law firms) seem to deter many potential CCB users. If the plaintiffs’ lawyers aren’t steering clients towards it, and if both the firms and copyright owners see more value in consolidating cases in federal court, the CCB will most likely cater to the copyright owner who doesn’t have a lawyer and views an occasional small claims proceeding as its best hope; and possibly the rare circumstances where a CCB proceeding will be more lucrative than a federal court proceeding (like where the owner has an unregistered copyright and would prefer the statutory damages available only in the CCB). If these become the main CCB use cases, I imagine there will be dozens of CCB cases in a year, not thousands or even hundreds, and the CCB will not be an especially important adjudicatory venue.