4 ms·

There were some great insights in the prior discussion at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4360626 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4360626. Something I

by mherdeg 14y ago

There were some great insights in the prior discussion at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4360626 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4360626. Something I was hoping to hear more discussion about: is there any evidence that anyone in the e-book community knowingly filed an incorrect DMCA takedown notice?

nicholassmith 14y ago
You'd probably need to wade through the takedown notices, but given they were claiming it was acting in a manner to enable piracy rather than lending the assumption is the majority will have been filed incorrectly.
- rmc 14y ago
  So the question is then, are any of them going to be prosecuted for perjury and lying under oath? I believe you must swear under penalty of perjury to send a DMCA notice.
  - drivingmenuts 14y ago
    Probably not, thought they certainly deserve it. My guess is that the owner of LendInk has neither the time, nor the resources, to pursue all of the authors that filed false/ignorant DMCA notices, and more likely wants to wash his/her hands of the whole thing. It's just one of those tragedies that will never see any kind of justice. Welcome to the world. It's another day.
  - rprasad 14y ago
    They're not committing perjury. Perjury requires that someone know that what they are saying is factually incorrect at the time they are saying it. The authors in this matter are not technologically sophisticated enough to understand how either the Kindle Lending or LendInk work(ed). They actually believe that it is promoting piracy. Thus, they are not committing perjury in their DMCA notices.
ilamont 14y ago
There is at least one person who filed a DMCA takedown, but I don't believe the author understood how ebook lending or LendInk worked: “My name is O. G. Tomes and I am the Author of The Sanctuary Saga: No Harm to Charm, book one; Test of Faith, book two and Charms of the Sisterhood,vol. I, II and III. A website that your company hosts (according to WHOIS information) is infringing on at least five copyrights owned by my company. Articles were copied onto your servers without permission. The original BOOKS, and their covers to which I own the exclusive copyrights, can be found at: Amazon.com and Smashwords.com The unauthorized and infringing copy can be found at: http://www.lendink.com/feed.php http://www.lendink.com/feed.php This letter is official notification under Section 512(c) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (”DMCA”), and I seek the removal of the aforementioned infringing material from your servers. I request that you immediately notify the infringer of this notice and inform them of their duty to remove the infringing material immediately, and notify them to cease any further posting of infringing material to your server in the future." Source: http://www.2abd.com/politics/copyright/lendink-taken-down-by-asshole-indie-authors/ http://www.2abd.com/politics/copyright/lendink-taken-down-by...

by mherdeg 14y ago

nicholassmith 14y ago

You'd probably need to wade through the takedown notices, but given they were claiming it was acting in a manner to enable piracy rather than lending the assumption is the majority will have been filed incorrectly.

rmc 14y ago
So the question is then, are any of them going to be prosecuted for perjury and lying under oath? I believe you must swear under penalty of perjury to send a DMCA notice.
- drivingmenuts 14y ago
  Probably not, thought they certainly deserve it. My guess is that the owner of LendInk has neither the time, nor the resources, to pursue all of the authors that filed false/ignorant DMCA notices, and more likely wants to wash his/her hands of the whole thing. It's just one of those tragedies that will never see any kind of justice. Welcome to the world. It's another day.
- rprasad 14y ago
  They're not committing perjury. Perjury requires that someone know that what they are saying is factually incorrect at the time they are saying it. The authors in this matter are not technologically sophisticated enough to understand how either the Kindle Lending or LendInk work(ed). They actually believe that it is promoting piracy. Thus, they are not committing perjury in their DMCA notices.

ilamont 14y ago

There is at least one person who filed a DMCA takedown, but I don't believe the author understood how ebook lending or LendInk worked: “My name is O. G. Tomes and I am the Author of The Sanctuary Saga: No Harm to Charm, book one; Test of Faith, book two and Charms of the Sisterhood,vol. I, II and III. A website that your company hosts (according to WHOIS information) is infringing on at least five copyrights owned by my company. Articles were copied onto your servers without permission. The original BOOKS, and their covers to which I own the exclusive copyrights, can be found at: Amazon.com and Smashwords.com The unauthorized and infringing copy can be found at: http://www.lendink.com/feed.php http://www.lendink.com/feed.php This letter is official notification under Section 512(c) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (”DMCA”), and I seek the removal of the aforementioned infringing material from your servers. I request that you immediately notify the infringer of this notice and inform them of their duty to remove the infringing material immediately, and notify them to cease any further posting of infringing material to your server in the future." Source: http://www.2abd.com/politics/copyright/lendink-taken-down-by-asshole-indie-authors/ http://www.2abd.com/politics/copyright/lendink-taken-down-by...