3 ms·
A few things: When Twitter gets a DMCA they have to act immediately, even if they plan to fight it. It's part of the safe harbor laws. Tweeting potentially cop
by codezero 13y ago
A few things: When Twitter gets a DMCA they have to act immediately, even if they plan to fight it. It's part of the safe harbor laws.
Tweeting potentially copyright protected material is not illegal until it's been proven to be in court. Fair Use isn't valid before someone gets sued. You can claim that if sued you will defend yourself under Fair Use, but it's up to a judge to decide whether your claims are valid.
Basically, nobody wants to go to court, having the content taken down is unfortunate, but also necessary so that both sides of the law are represented (holders and users of copyright).
- mnordhoff 13y agoNobody wants to go to court, but a studio with a hundred million dollar legal budget can (though they won't for something silly), and your average ramen-noodling, tweeting university student can't. There is no equal representation between someone who can make any ridiculous DMCA claim they want and someone who cannot afford a court battle to prove them wrong. (By the way, this is a general rant, not a reference to this case.)
- codezero 13y agoThe catch here is that content providers don't want to give in to DMCA complaints. That's why chilling effects exists. Providers will often go a long way to be as permissive as possible and to cause as much pain for frivolous complaints as possible. Also give some credits to judges. They won't just give in because a company is rich and litigious, well at least not in most districts :)
- codezero 13y agoWhat I mean to say is that this is really a beef between the holders and the host. The supposed violator (person who posted) is something of an innocent bystander. And by that, I mean hosts are usually as sympathetic as possible.