4 ms·
Last time I was looking into it, the DMCA required that the subject was taken down _before_ you did the verification of the claim. So the DMCA basically is requ
by shakna 3y ago
Last time I was looking into it, the DMCA required that the subject was taken down _before_ you did the verification of the claim. So the DMCA basically is required to be an automatic process.
- chii 3y agoas it is written, the DMCA strongly favours the accusing party, and there's minimal blowback from a fraudulent claim. It has got to be one of the worst pieces of legislation to have been written and enacted.
- sophacles 3y agoNot to mention anti-circumvention provisions that change the definition of "own".
- OkayPhysicist 3y agoIn the case of a proper DMCA takedown (as opposed to something like YouTube's pre-DMCA report system), you can (and should) sue the person who issued a fraudulent takedown for damages caused by the takedown.
- dspillett 3y agoThe post you replied to wasn't particularly complaining about the initial takedown (required, as you say, by the DMCA), but the terrible appeals process when this is applied to a spurious claim.
- jeroenhd 3y agoOh, for sure! The takedown itself must happen immediately because of the unbalanced nature of the DMCA. However, the verification doesn't need to be an automatic system. Google would not be at fault if they took down the page, had someone competent enough investigate the takedown, and then make a decision. The current system doesn't even start a real investigation until you object and even then the investigation isn't exactly thorough.