4 ms·

When someone sends a DMCA notice, they state that "under penalty of perjury, they are authorized on behalf of the copyright holder". That is the only part that

by Dwedit 3y ago

When someone sends a DMCA notice, they state that "under penalty of perjury, they are authorized on behalf of the copyright holder". That is the only part that they can get in trouble for. Whether the work is identified correctly or not is irrelevant.

jojobas 3y ago
Depends on your definition of trouble. You can counterclaim that the content you're sharing is in fact fair use or otherwise not infringing, the original claiming party has some time to sue you, and if they don't, you can sue them for damages caused by the takedown. I don't know whether anything can be done about a takedown notice on content that never existed in the first place, perhaps some generic harassment complaint?
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  > and if they don't, you can sue them for damages caused by the takedown. You can counter-sue them regardless of whether or not they sue you. They have made a claim that you are in violation of the law. You are allowed to go to court first to get a "declaratory judgment" that you are not. https://youtu.be/-7H8SZMwz24?t=1320 https://youtu.be/-7H8SZMwz24?t=1320 (30 seconds to watch relevant part)
  - dtgriscom 3y ago
    Would there be damages if their claim was found false? If not, then that's still just legal noise to them (although it could be a step towards something that actually hurts).
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      In jurisdictions which allow it, probably some attorney/filing fees.
theemathas 3y ago
This youtuber got a fraudulent DMCA notice, and his counter-notice got automatically rejected. The person who sent the notice isn't associated with the devs, and is asking for a $100 ransom to get the channel reinstated. How could this be fixed? Proof that the person sending the notice isn't "authorized on behalf of the copyright holder": https://twitter.com/Lionheart/status/1671349063931838464 https://twitter.com/Lionheart/status/1671349063931838464 Tweet about the automatic rejection of the counter-notice: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671696220190810113 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671696220190810113 Tweet about the initial DMCA takedown: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671323777978736643 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671323777978736643 Mention of the $100 ransom: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671332970836140032 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671332970836140032 Any youtube people on here can help?

by Dwedit 3y ago

jojobas 3y ago

Depends on your definition of trouble. You can counterclaim that the content you're sharing is in fact fair use or otherwise not infringing, the original claiming party has some time to sue you, and if they don't, you can sue them for damages caused by the takedown. I don't know whether anything can be done about a takedown notice on content that never existed in the first place, perhaps some generic harassment complaint?

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
> and if they don't, you can sue them for damages caused by the takedown. You can counter-sue them regardless of whether or not they sue you. They have made a claim that you are in violation of the law. You are allowed to go to court first to get a "declaratory judgment" that you are not. https://youtu.be/-7H8SZMwz24?t=1320 https://youtu.be/-7H8SZMwz24?t=1320 (30 seconds to watch relevant part)
- dtgriscom 3y ago
  Would there be damages if their claim was found false? If not, then that's still just legal noise to them (although it could be a step towards something that actually hurts).
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    In jurisdictions which allow it, probably some attorney/filing fees.

theemathas 3y ago

This youtuber got a fraudulent DMCA notice, and his counter-notice got automatically rejected. The person who sent the notice isn't associated with the devs, and is asking for a $100 ransom to get the channel reinstated. How could this be fixed? Proof that the person sending the notice isn't "authorized on behalf of the copyright holder": https://twitter.com/Lionheart/status/1671349063931838464 https://twitter.com/Lionheart/status/1671349063931838464 Tweet about the automatic rejection of the counter-notice: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671696220190810113 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671696220190810113 Tweet about the initial DMCA takedown: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671323777978736643 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671323777978736643 Mention of the $100 ransom: https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671332970836140032 https://twitter.com/Azrial_Vanity/status/1671332970836140032 Any youtube people on here can help?