3 ms·

>Through discovery, Shopify hopes to identify the John Doe and hold them responsible for the recent wave of DMCA abuse. This sounds quite bizzare. Is this a DM

>Through discovery, Shopify hopes to identify the John Doe and hold them responsible for the recent wave of DMCA abuse. This sounds quite bizzare. Is this a DMCA feature or just Shopify's sloppiness ? How did they act upon DMCA notices without even knowing the identity of the claimant ?

chatmasta 3y ago
Claimants don't need to provide any sort of identity documents. This is a common path of harassment on YouTube for example - make a fake email and submit a DMCA against someone's channel.
- LelouBil 3y ago
  That seems horrible
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It’s even worse. If you have an anonymous YouTube channel, I could file a false DCMA claim against you, unauthenticated, and if you want to counter it you have to dox yourself to me (or hire legal counsel to act as your agent and be doxed instead).
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  That is not part of the law, and infact the legal requirement to submit a DMCA take down is to affirm under penalty of perjury that you own the copyright or are authorized to act on behalf of the owner paragraph 3A(vi) requires: 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 in-fringed. This would then necessitate some kind of identity confirmation, the fact these companies for their own expedient and costs have implemented an easily abused system because "scale" and over reliance on automated systems
  - jmholla 3y ago
    Further, it requires that notices contain (per paragraph 3A(iv)): > Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted. so if they can't get a hold of John Doe, these notices would seem to be invalidt to me.
  - mr_toad 3y ago
    > affirm under penalty of perjury But unless that penalty is actually imposed the law isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

chatmasta 3y ago

Claimants don't need to provide any sort of identity documents. This is a common path of harassment on YouTube for example - make a fake email and submit a DMCA against someone's channel.

LelouBil 3y ago
That seems horrible
- bombcar 3y ago
  It’s even worse. If you have an anonymous YouTube channel, I could file a false DCMA claim against you, unauthenticated, and if you want to counter it you have to dox yourself to me (or hire legal counsel to act as your agent and be doxed instead).
phpisthebest 3y ago
That is not part of the law, and infact the legal requirement to submit a DMCA take down is to affirm under penalty of perjury that you own the copyright or are authorized to act on behalf of the owner paragraph 3A(vi) requires: 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 in-fringed. This would then necessitate some kind of identity confirmation, the fact these companies for their own expedient and costs have implemented an easily abused system because "scale" and over reliance on automated systems
- jmholla 3y ago
  Further, it requires that notices contain (per paragraph 3A(iv)): > Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted. so if they can't get a hold of John Doe, these notices would seem to be invalidt to me.
- mr_toad 3y ago
  > affirm under penalty of perjury But unless that penalty is actually imposed the law isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.