3 ms·
> with the expected loss of 100,000 despite rarely being wrong To those 10% you were absolutely wrong. Why should they suffer because you were "mostly right" w
by FireBeyond 3y ago
> with the expected loss of 100,000 despite rarely being wrong
To those 10% you were absolutely wrong. Why should they suffer because you were "mostly right" with other people?
- zamadatix 3y agoI don't think you get out of this with 0 suffering for everyone. That'd require some utopian method of figuring all of this out completely automatically with no errors for free. It's just not a realistic bar to measure either side on. As for amount of suffering an actual DMCA counter notice is an extremely easy thing to provide. What sites like e.g. YouTube do instead via backdoor agreements with IP holders outside the regulatory structure is where the real inconvenience comes from. That said, I wouldn't mind a bit more shift in general to make things slightly more difficult for copyright owners though. Just not as major a one as saying 100% of claims need to be valid from the get go or it's not viable for copyright holders.
- FireBeyond 3y agoCertainly, but false positives here mean actual infringement of a person's rights to protect someone else from potential infringement. I'm not sure how that is justifiable.