3 ms·

It seems to me that DMCA abuse is far more harmful than the copyright infringement it intends to fight. At the very least, DMCA takedown notices should only be

by mcv 3y ago

It seems to me that DMCA abuse is far more harmful than the copyright infringement it intends to fight. At the very least, DMCA takedown notices should only be accepted from verified, existing people, and not from anonymous accounts. And then those verified people need to be held accountable for any abuse.

SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
The DMCA requires that you assert you own the copyright on some work (under penalty of perjury), and also that some other work infringes on that (no penalty at all). Adding liability in the case that the work is found not to be infringing, including substantial punitive damages paid to the accused (covering their time, emotional distress of being targeted by a lawsuit, attorney fees, and some amount extra) and the hosting provider (for wasting their time), would be a good reform.
- ghaff 3y ago
  The DMCA arguably did not envision mass, often false, takedown requests. The problem with substantial punitive damages however is that you will have people who do legit requests that are determined to be false per haps by algorithms. (Or that are in some gray area.) >damages paid to the accused (covering their time, emotional distress of being targeted by a lawsuit, attorney fees, and some amount extra) Now you're talking fining people thousands of dollars even though they may have been in the right.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
    No, I'm talking about fining people thousands of dollars after being found guilty of falsely accusing others of infringement.
- bityard 3y ago
  Okay, yes, but essentially all abusive takedown requests are filed under a false name altogether, or by scummy law firms adept at hiding the people who actually run them. So, if you are the victim of a fake takedown request, either you are not going to find them because they don't exist, or if they do exist, they are beyond your reach. There is no means to enforce this penalty unless your opponent decides to by the rules. (Spoiler: they won't.)
marcosdumay 3y ago
> It seems to me that DMCA abuse is far more harmful than the copyright infringement it intends to fight. This is by design. Every single person involved was well informed about the consequences of the law when the US Congress was discussing it.

by mcv 3y ago

SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago

The DMCA requires that you assert you own the copyright on some work (under penalty of perjury), and also that some other work infringes on that (no penalty at all). Adding liability in the case that the work is found not to be infringing, including substantial punitive damages paid to the accused (covering their time, emotional distress of being targeted by a lawsuit, attorney fees, and some amount extra) and the hosting provider (for wasting their time), would be a good reform.

ghaff 3y ago
The DMCA arguably did not envision mass, often false, takedown requests. The problem with substantial punitive damages however is that you will have people who do legit requests that are determined to be false per haps by algorithms. (Or that are in some gray area.) >damages paid to the accused (covering their time, emotional distress of being targeted by a lawsuit, attorney fees, and some amount extra) Now you're talking fining people thousands of dollars even though they may have been in the right.
- SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
  No, I'm talking about fining people thousands of dollars after being found guilty of falsely accusing others of infringement.
bityard 3y ago
Okay, yes, but essentially all abusive takedown requests are filed under a false name altogether, or by scummy law firms adept at hiding the people who actually run them. So, if you are the victim of a fake takedown request, either you are not going to find them because they don't exist, or if they do exist, they are beyond your reach. There is no means to enforce this penalty unless your opponent decides to by the rules. (Spoiler: they won't.)

marcosdumay 3y ago

> It seems to me that DMCA abuse is far more harmful than the copyright infringement it intends to fight. This is by design. Every single person involved was well informed about the consequences of the law when the US Congress was discussing it.