3 ms·

While Nintendo is infamously litigious, there's speculation (without concrete evidence either way) that the recent string of DMCA takedown requests were not mad

While Nintendo is infamously litigious, there's speculation (without concrete evidence either way) that the recent string of DMCA takedown requests were not made by Nintendo themselves, but by someone impersonating them (as for why, who knows, some people get very caught up in the "emulation hurts game studios" line of thinking).

wtallis 3y ago
That seems implausible. There's only one way for the sender of a DMCA takedown notice to get in serious trouble, and that's by lying about being authorized by the copyright holder to send DMCA notices over their works: > 17 U.S. Code §512(c)(3)(A)(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (emphasis added)
- Retr0id 3y ago
  Submitting a DMCA takedown request does not require any authentication beyond a declaration that you're telling the truth. Anyone can do it, even over a Tor connection.
  - wtallis 3y ago
    A DMCA notice requires the aforementioned declaration under penalty of perjury, plus some other declarations that are merely required to be good faith beliefs, plus contact information for the sender. That last bit makes it quite easy to discover that a DMCA notice was faked, thus quite risky for the sender: either they provide contact information for themselves that will be repudiated by the actual copyright holder should anyone question it, or they provide contact information for the actual copyright holder and are unable to carry the charade beyond the initial message and the takedown will not last beyond the initial ~2 weeks for a counterclaim to take effect (plus they'd catch the notice of the actual corporate legal department, who are unlikely to appreciate the impersonation).
    - clessg 3y ago
      > the takedown will not last beyond the initial ~2 weeks for a counterclaim to take effect I wonder how often a DMCA recipient actually bothers with a counterclaim, though? I thought counter-notices were extremely risky, particularly when dealing with a (seemingly) deep-pocketed entity. Doesn't a counterclaim open oneself up to immediate ligitation within 2 weeks, else the content must remain? If it is in fact the rightsholder, I assume they won't be happy to simply let the allegedly infringing content stand - which means they have to sue. Of course, if one really believes the claim to be bogus, they can always test it in court. They might even be right, but I suspect they'll be bankrupt nonetheless. I guess the solution is to just reach out to the listed contact directly... Without it being in the form of a counterclaim? I love this system.
      - charcircuit 3y ago
        If you infringe someone's copyright they can take legal action at any time. The 2 week timeline is just how long your content takes to be reactivated if they aren't sueing you.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - jokethrowaway 3y ago
      I've worked in the field. Almost nobody bothers with a counter notice. It's just risky. Either they ignore it and you have to evaluate whether you'll gain or lose money by suing (oftentimes that's not the case, good luck bringing to court some 13 years old living in a different country and making 2k per month from ads) or they just comply as soon as possible to avoid legal drama.
    - kevingadd 3y ago
      There's no way to actually enforce the penalty of perjury in many cases. I've tried before, lots of big companies will ignore you when you try to get the information on the person who filed the fraudulent claim, which prevents you from doing anything about it. Unless you feel like also suing Google or Valve.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  Has anyone faced consequences as a result?
  - wtallis 3y ago
    I don't think anyone intelligent enough to compose something resembling a valid DMCA takedown notice would be stupid enough to fake it in that particular manner, when the law deliberately leaves much wider and safer gaps for a sender to abuse the takedown process.
    - anonzzzies 3y ago
      How about if you don’t live in the US? A few million lawsuit is not going to get you extradited, but let’s say the dmca request was created in Russia.
      - anticensor 3y ago
        Not even then. Copyright infringement is normally tried in the infringer's jurisdiction.
        dingledork69 3y ago
        So got any links to such cases? Its 100% certain some kids have sent invalid DMCA notices over the years. It's basically a prank that doesn't get you into trouble, at this point.
- vanchor3 3y ago
  Whoever's been trying to wipe the game Cookie's Bustle off the internet clearly hasn't been punished at all, even when they pretended to be Nintendo.

wtallis 3y ago

That seems implausible. There's only one way for the sender of a DMCA takedown notice to get in serious trouble, and that's by lying about being authorized by the copyright holder to send DMCA notices over their works: > 17 U.S. Code §512(c)(3)(A)(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (emphasis added)

Retr0id 3y ago
Submitting a DMCA takedown request does not require any authentication beyond a declaration that you're telling the truth. Anyone can do it, even over a Tor connection.
- wtallis 3y ago
  A DMCA notice requires the aforementioned declaration under penalty of perjury, plus some other declarations that are merely required to be good faith beliefs, plus contact information for the sender. That last bit makes it quite easy to discover that a DMCA notice was faked, thus quite risky for the sender: either they provide contact information for themselves that will be repudiated by the actual copyright holder should anyone question it, or they provide contact information for the actual copyright holder and are unable to carry the charade beyond the initial message and the takedown will not last beyond the initial ~2 weeks for a counterclaim to take effect (plus they'd catch the notice of the actual corporate legal department, who are unlikely to appreciate the impersonation).
  - clessg 3y ago
    > the takedown will not last beyond the initial ~2 weeks for a counterclaim to take effect I wonder how often a DMCA recipient actually bothers with a counterclaim, though? I thought counter-notices were extremely risky, particularly when dealing with a (seemingly) deep-pocketed entity. Doesn't a counterclaim open oneself up to immediate ligitation within 2 weeks, else the content must remain? If it is in fact the rightsholder, I assume they won't be happy to simply let the allegedly infringing content stand - which means they have to sue. Of course, if one really believes the claim to be bogus, they can always test it in court. They might even be right, but I suspect they'll be bankrupt nonetheless. I guess the solution is to just reach out to the listed contact directly... Without it being in the form of a counterclaim? I love this system.
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      If you infringe someone's copyright they can take legal action at any time. The 2 week timeline is just how long your content takes to be reactivated if they aren't sueing you.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jokethrowaway 3y ago
    I've worked in the field. Almost nobody bothers with a counter notice. It's just risky. Either they ignore it and you have to evaluate whether you'll gain or lose money by suing (oftentimes that's not the case, good luck bringing to court some 13 years old living in a different country and making 2k per month from ads) or they just comply as soon as possible to avoid legal drama.
  - kevingadd 3y ago
    There's no way to actually enforce the penalty of perjury in many cases. I've tried before, lots of big companies will ignore you when you try to get the information on the person who filed the fraudulent claim, which prevents you from doing anything about it. Unless you feel like also suing Google or Valve.
arcticbull 3y ago
Has anyone faced consequences as a result?
- wtallis 3y ago
  I don't think anyone intelligent enough to compose something resembling a valid DMCA takedown notice would be stupid enough to fake it in that particular manner, when the law deliberately leaves much wider and safer gaps for a sender to abuse the takedown process.
  - anonzzzies 3y ago
    How about if you don’t live in the US? A few million lawsuit is not going to get you extradited, but let’s say the dmca request was created in Russia.
    - anticensor 3y ago
      Not even then. Copyright infringement is normally tried in the infringer's jurisdiction.
      - dingledork69 3y ago
        So got any links to such cases? Its 100% certain some kids have sent invalid DMCA notices over the years. It's basically a prank that doesn't get you into trouble, at this point.
vanchor3 3y ago
Whoever's been trying to wipe the game Cookie's Bustle off the internet clearly hasn't been punished at all, even when they pretended to be Nintendo.