6 ms·

I own http://ihackernews.com http://ihackernews.com which reformats HackerNews for mobile phones. I had a DMCA takedown notice sent to me on behalf of a websit

by ronnier 12y ago

I own http://ihackernews.com http://ihackernews.com which reformats HackerNews for mobile phones. I had a DMCA takedown notice sent to me on behalf of a website owner who didn't want me linking to their site. My hosting provider gave me 24 hours to remove the link or else they'd cancel my account. The owner of the link claimed that their Google rankings were dropping because my site, iHackernews, linked to their site. With this, they were able to force me to remove it via a DMCA takedown notice.

jqm 12y ago
Interesting. Good to know how to deal with this problem should it arise. In your case obviously it was unjust though.
greenyoda 12y ago
Why didn't you challenge the takedown notice as being fraudulent? As far as I know, DMCA does not prohibit linking to web pages; it's only about hosting someone else's copyrighted content on your site (or maybe posting links to pirated content).
- ronnier 12y ago
  I just don't have time to deal with it. Removing it was the quickest way possible for me to resolve the issue and not have my account closed.
  - simon_vetter 12y ago
    and, if they're abusing the DMCA like others have said, you're giving in to FUD, which is exactly what they want.
- WildUtah 12y ago
  Challenging a DMCA takedown requires you to accept that your whole site will be taken down for ten days while you wait to have a right to challenge the takedown. Businesses or projects that have to keep functioning have to comply with any takedown regardless of its validity because they can't just go out of business for ten days in order to challenge it.
  - greenyoda 12y ago
    Wouldn't temporarily removing the disputed item pending the resolution of the challenge prevent your entire site from being taken down?
- duskwuff 12y ago
  You don't even need to formally challenge it. Any DMCA takedown request requesting that a link be removed is malformed, becuase it does not identify a copyrighted work that is being infringed. You can safely ignore such a request, or bounce it back requesting that the sender specify what copyrighted work is in question.
  - mnw21cam 12y ago
    Yes, but the person receiving the DMCA request was the hosting service, which had no intention of being sane. DMCA takedown notices cannot be ignored.
jamesbritt 12y ago
I had a DMCA takedown notice sent to me on behalf of a website owner who didn't want me linking to their site. How does that even work? How does the DMCA apply such that I can invoke it to tell you to stop linking to my site? I'm guessing it doesn't, but if you're at the mercy of a hosting service that doesn't actually understand the DMCA you're in a jam.
- notatoad 12y ago
  The way the DMCA works ISPs or any other service hosting third-party content must comply with every takedown notice immediately, regardless of it's legitimacy, if they want to continue to enjoy the protections of the DMCA. (meaning, unless they want to accept liability for the copyright of every piece of content on their servers). So yes, it absolutely does work that way: you can send a takedown notice to anybody for any reason and they must comply with it. The logic is that DMCA notices are sent under penalty of perjury, and people aren't going to risk perjuring themselves just to improve their SEO or take down a blog post they don't like. Unfortunately, the courts seem willing to accept excuses like "the automated process i use to send out DMCA takedown notices got a little overzealous" as legitimate, so DMCA takedowns are now pretty much just a free-for-all for anybody who wants anything taken down.
  - Myrth 12y ago
    Someone needs to send a couple of millions DMCA takedown requests from random sources to random targets, to make this problem visible.
    - sillysaurus3 12y ago
      Hurting innocents in the pursuit of political reform isn't the way to go.
      - J_Darnley 12y ago
        Several places in the world have shown that to be effective. And that would be real physical harm.
higherpurpose 12y ago
One of the worst decision in Google search history: to base ranking on DMCA's received... It's bad enough that they have automated the process to allow companies to delete millions of links from Google every year, but to downrank sites is a bit overboard.
- mcintyre1994 12y ago
  I didn't know they did that, I wonder how strong a signal it is. If you search for a review or something of a recent TV show (my favourite is eg game of thrones S4E5) and forget to mention you want reviews, you find lots of sites that must be getting DMCAs. Also Youtube must get a lot of them, probably one of the top served sites at a guess?
- dsymonds 12y ago
  Do you have evidence that happens? That sounds very strange.
ggreer 12y ago
Could you please tell us your hosting provider and the website that sent the DMCA notice? I'd like to avoid both of them, if I can.
- ronnier 12y ago
  This was the link: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jayjay1010 https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jayjay1010 http://linkaudit.co.uk/ http://linkaudit.co.uk/ Which I've blocked: http://ihackernews.com/by/jayjay1010 http://ihackernews.com/by/jayjay1010 My host is Softsys hosting. http://www.softsyshosting.com http://www.softsyshosting.com
  - nivla 12y ago
    Ohh the irony of them being a "Link removing service". I wonder how it would have affected the credibility & guarantee of their service had you told them no.
kreeben 12y ago
What a terrible hosting provider you have. Who are they?
- tristanperry 12y ago
  Not sure when the post was made, but ronnier later replied that it's http://www.softsyshosting.com http://www.softsyshosting.com. I definitely agree though - they sound like a very poor host. One of my websites received an invalid DMCA via my host, and my host handled it well (i.e. listening to my side of the story, before deciding not to pursue the 'complaint'). Any host that handles DMCAs so poorly (i.e. threatening their customers without knowing the facts) doesn't deserve to be in business IMO.

by ronnier 12y ago

jqm 12y ago

Interesting. Good to know how to deal with this problem should it arise. In your case obviously it was unjust though.

greenyoda 12y ago

Why didn't you challenge the takedown notice as being fraudulent? As far as I know, DMCA does not prohibit linking to web pages; it's only about hosting someone else's copyrighted content on your site (or maybe posting links to pirated content).

ronnier 12y ago
I just don't have time to deal with it. Removing it was the quickest way possible for me to resolve the issue and not have my account closed.
- simon_vetter 12y ago
  and, if they're abusing the DMCA like others have said, you're giving in to FUD, which is exactly what they want.
WildUtah 12y ago
Challenging a DMCA takedown requires you to accept that your whole site will be taken down for ten days while you wait to have a right to challenge the takedown. Businesses or projects that have to keep functioning have to comply with any takedown regardless of its validity because they can't just go out of business for ten days in order to challenge it.
- greenyoda 12y ago
  Wouldn't temporarily removing the disputed item pending the resolution of the challenge prevent your entire site from being taken down?
duskwuff 12y ago
You don't even need to formally challenge it. Any DMCA takedown request requesting that a link be removed is malformed, becuase it does not identify a copyrighted work that is being infringed. You can safely ignore such a request, or bounce it back requesting that the sender specify what copyrighted work is in question.
- mnw21cam 12y ago
  Yes, but the person receiving the DMCA request was the hosting service, which had no intention of being sane. DMCA takedown notices cannot be ignored.

jamesbritt 12y ago

I had a DMCA takedown notice sent to me on behalf of a website owner who didn't want me linking to their site. How does that even work? How does the DMCA apply such that I can invoke it to tell you to stop linking to my site? I'm guessing it doesn't, but if you're at the mercy of a hosting service that doesn't actually understand the DMCA you're in a jam.

notatoad 12y ago
The way the DMCA works ISPs or any other service hosting third-party content must comply with every takedown notice immediately, regardless of it's legitimacy, if they want to continue to enjoy the protections of the DMCA. (meaning, unless they want to accept liability for the copyright of every piece of content on their servers). So yes, it absolutely does work that way: you can send a takedown notice to anybody for any reason and they must comply with it. The logic is that DMCA notices are sent under penalty of perjury, and people aren't going to risk perjuring themselves just to improve their SEO or take down a blog post they don't like. Unfortunately, the courts seem willing to accept excuses like "the automated process i use to send out DMCA takedown notices got a little overzealous" as legitimate, so DMCA takedowns are now pretty much just a free-for-all for anybody who wants anything taken down.
- Myrth 12y ago
  Someone needs to send a couple of millions DMCA takedown requests from random sources to random targets, to make this problem visible.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    Hurting innocents in the pursuit of political reform isn't the way to go.
    - J_Darnley 12y ago
      Several places in the world have shown that to be effective. And that would be real physical harm.

higherpurpose 12y ago

One of the worst decision in Google search history: to base ranking on DMCA's received... It's bad enough that they have automated the process to allow companies to delete millions of links from Google every year, but to downrank sites is a bit overboard.

mcintyre1994 12y ago
I didn't know they did that, I wonder how strong a signal it is. If you search for a review or something of a recent TV show (my favourite is eg game of thrones S4E5) and forget to mention you want reviews, you find lots of sites that must be getting DMCAs. Also Youtube must get a lot of them, probably one of the top served sites at a guess?
dsymonds 12y ago
Do you have evidence that happens? That sounds very strange.

ggreer 12y ago

Could you please tell us your hosting provider and the website that sent the DMCA notice? I'd like to avoid both of them, if I can.

ronnier 12y ago
This was the link: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jayjay1010 https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jayjay1010 http://linkaudit.co.uk/ http://linkaudit.co.uk/ Which I've blocked: http://ihackernews.com/by/jayjay1010 http://ihackernews.com/by/jayjay1010 My host is Softsys hosting. http://www.softsyshosting.com http://www.softsyshosting.com
- nivla 12y ago
  Ohh the irony of them being a "Link removing service". I wonder how it would have affected the credibility & guarantee of their service had you told them no.

kreeben 12y ago

What a terrible hosting provider you have. Who are they?

tristanperry 12y ago
Not sure when the post was made, but ronnier later replied that it's http://www.softsyshosting.com http://www.softsyshosting.com. I definitely agree though - they sound like a very poor host. One of my websites received an invalid DMCA via my host, and my host handled it well (i.e. listening to my side of the story, before deciding not to pursue the 'complaint'). Any host that handles DMCAs so poorly (i.e. threatening their customers without knowing the facts) doesn't deserve to be in business IMO.