4 ms·
I agree that tech companies have nonexistent support because they refuse to hire people to do it, but the DMCA is a terrible law and enables people to do this w
by variadix 3y ago
I agree that tech companies have nonexistent support because they refuse to hire people to do it, but the DMCA is a terrible law and enables people to do this way too easily. It should cost money (or something) to file a DMCA claim to prevent copyright trolls and people from abusing the legal system.
- olliej 3y agoTech companies _cannot_ do anything. The DMCA is a terrible law, and requires that the company receiving a DMCA take down immediately take the claimed URLs down, or become liable if the claims aren't fraudulent. I recall originally it sounded like not only was an immediate take down required, but also they had to keep it down for two weeks even if the victim files a counter claim showing that it's BS. The law is designed specifically to enable this, because the recording industry bought a bunch of politicians, and said "hey we need to have a zero cost zero risk mechanism for us to remove content we believe to be pirated, without having any penalties for being wrong, but there must be penalties for the host services if they try to stop us".
- djfdat 3y agoIf the cost to file is less than the opportunity cost, it's not a deterrence.
- Zuiii 3y agoit creates a paper trail that is far more harder to obfuscate. I agree with gp, filing dmca should come with a filing fee.
- echaozh 3y agoIt could be a large deposit, to be returned if the case is verified, or to be rewarded to the victim if it turn out to be vicious.
- Zuiii 3y agoI like this. Large deposit with some gov agency and the money gets awarded to the victim (or refunded to the claimant) when the dispute is finally resolved. You don't submit a claim unless you're really sure that you'd win. This is how the DMCA should have been designed in the first place.