A copyright holder identifies (with a DMCA filing) a copyright violation on the partial publishing of his copyrighted work. Technically, the publishing is not v

A copyright holder identifies (with a DMCA filing) a copyright violation on the partial publishing of his copyrighted work. Technically, the publishing is not violating the copyright rules (because of some exception in the law). This DMCA filing would be incorrect. That is a difficult problem to solve if we want to add penalty and responsibility. If the error was done intentionally, we ask this to be considered perjury. Of course, if the error was done unintentionally, then it should not be perjury. Typically, this would be called a "false filing". False filing (of any document) is not "perjury" in law books. If the filing is done intentionally with error or malice, the false filing rule would/should cover such cases. If it is done negligently, it should be documented in record and held against the DMCA filer in the case of future submissions. If it is done irresponsibly, then there should be a fine/ticket. If it is done with malice, the affected party should sue for damage including punitive damages including but not limited to the loss of copyright work. Of course, accusations like this need a heavy amount of proof, else it would adversely affect both the copyright holder, the DMCA filer, the producer, and the publisher.