3 ms·
Why not just respond to the initial dcma rather than playing a game of cat and mouse. No one is going to use it while it has dubious copyright status anyway.
by asdfaoeu 14y ago
Why not just respond to the initial dcma rather than playing a game of cat and mouse. No one is going to use it while it has dubious copyright status anyway.
- ceejayoz 14y agoThey did. https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerVault-counternotice.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2013-03-06-LayerV... Mirroring it while Github drags their feet reenabling seems fair enough.
- peejaybee 14y agoThat's not fair to Github, IMO; service providers have next to no discretion in DMCA issues.
- subsystem 14y agoGithub per the DMCA needs to wait 10 days before reenabling it. "[...] replaces the removed material and ceases disabling access to it not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days following receipt of the counter notice, unless its designated agent first receives notice from the person who submitted the notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) that such person has filed an action seeking a court order to restrain the subscriber from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on the service provider’s system or network."
- ceejayoz 14y agoTIL! What an odd requirement.
- asdfaoeu 14y agoWow my bad, I had assumed DMCA counter notices were instantaneous.
- MereInterest 14y agoIs there a (non-malevolent) reason for this clause? It seems to be something put in to deliberately slow down proceedings and apply a penalty to the accused regardless of what happens.
- px1999 14y agoIt's there to deter fake counternotices by giving the original issuer time to seek an injunction / file a lawsuit I think.
- corresation 14y agoNo one is going to use it while it has dubious copyright status anyway By that measure everything has a dubious copyright status, as anyone can send out DCMA notices.
- jnxfgf456 14y agoI'm still using it.