3 ms·
Often the damage from fraudulent takedowns is relative to timing. For example (and this is just an example): Let's say I put up an expose of bad behavior by a
by indymike 3y ago
Often the damage from fraudulent takedowns is relative to timing.
For example (and this is just an example): Let's say I put up an expose of bad behavior by a politician two days before an election. Something awful that will get coverage in the media and social media, too. The campaign fake DMCAs it, the content is gone, and the election is won before the content is re-posted after the reply is processed.
There are situations where the notice/counter notice does not work and causes almost irreparable harm.
- Suppafly 3y agoSure, although if you know for a fact that your content is true, nothing is stopping you from reposting it multiple times/places for those two days. Regardless, I suspect the previous poster didn't follow the DMCA process and instead just wanted to complain. It's trivial to send a response and have your content rehosted, but most people don't bother.
- indymike 3y agoThere is no time requirement or requirement in general for the host to restore your content.