7 ms·

(Not a lawyer) My understanding is that you can't file a DMCA takedown against content/code that you don't own.

_ak 12y ago
Well, you can, but that would be fraudulent. But whoever you sent the DMCA takedown notice to, it's not their concern and not their duty to check whether you're the rightful copyright holder or not.
- dmd 12y ago
  Does this mean that someone could take down all of github by sending (fraudulent) DMCA takedown notices for every single repo (from some fake return address)? And then it would then be incumbent on the users to fight that?
  - stefan_kendall3 12y ago
    Yes. But in that case, GitHub would likely fight an obviously fraudulent copyright claim, as it would wreck their business. They're not hurt at all by popcorntime going down.
    - derefr 12y ago
      I don’t know, they seem to be being hurt a bit in the eyes of developers right here in this discussion.
  - emmett 12y ago
    No. The main requirement for a DMCA request to be valid is that it come from a real entity. If you sent them with a fake return address they wouldn't be valid DMCA requests anymore. That said, yes the DMCA can be abused. The check against that is the same check that exists against other kinds of fraud: it's illegal.
masklinn 12y ago
That's incomplete, you can also file DMCA takedown if you're the owner, an agent of the owner, or if the content is obviously illegal, as per 17§512 (c) (3) (A) (v): > A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. (emphasis mine) Of course the third case is a very dangerous game to play, if you're DMCA-trolling (filling false notices) you're guilty of misrepresentations which is covered by 17§512 (f): > Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section— > (1) that material or activity is infringing, or > (2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification, > shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.
- kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
  The copyright to the code of Popcorntime is held by its authors so a DMCA takedown on the code can't be issued on those grounds. However, it acts as a technology circumvention device (in a circuitous way) since it provides access to media that originally was encrypted. 17§1201 a.2: No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; 17§1201 a.3.A: to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
  - gamblor956 12y ago
    You're missing the relevant portion of the law. For a DMCA takedown notice for code, it doesn't matter who owns the copyright for the code. It is sufficient for purposes of the DMCA notice to allege that the code is being used for infringing purposes. 17 US 512(c)(3).
true_religion 12y ago
You can. It's just that the actual owners will probably sue you for doing so against their work if they've given permission to legally access it and you try to revoke that with a DMCA.

_ak 12y ago

Well, you can, but that would be fraudulent. But whoever you sent the DMCA takedown notice to, it's not their concern and not their duty to check whether you're the rightful copyright holder or not.

dmd 12y ago
Does this mean that someone could take down all of github by sending (fraudulent) DMCA takedown notices for every single repo (from some fake return address)? And then it would then be incumbent on the users to fight that?
- stefan_kendall3 12y ago
  Yes. But in that case, GitHub would likely fight an obviously fraudulent copyright claim, as it would wreck their business. They're not hurt at all by popcorntime going down.
  - derefr 12y ago
    I don’t know, they seem to be being hurt a bit in the eyes of developers right here in this discussion.
- emmett 12y ago
  No. The main requirement for a DMCA request to be valid is that it come from a real entity. If you sent them with a fake return address they wouldn't be valid DMCA requests anymore. That said, yes the DMCA can be abused. The check against that is the same check that exists against other kinds of fraud: it's illegal.

masklinn 12y ago

That's incomplete, you can also file DMCA takedown if you're the owner, an agent of the owner, or if the content is obviously illegal, as per 17§512 (c) (3) (A) (v): > A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. (emphasis mine) Of course the third case is a very dangerous game to play, if you're DMCA-trolling (filling false notices) you're guilty of misrepresentations which is covered by 17§512 (f): > Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section— > (1) that material or activity is infringing, or > (2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification, > shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.

kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
The copyright to the code of Popcorntime is held by its authors so a DMCA takedown on the code can't be issued on those grounds. However, it acts as a technology circumvention device (in a circuitous way) since it provides access to media that originally was encrypted. 17§1201 a.2: No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; 17§1201 a.3.A: to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
- gamblor956 12y ago
  You're missing the relevant portion of the law. For a DMCA takedown notice for code, it doesn't matter who owns the copyright for the code. It is sufficient for purposes of the DMCA notice to allege that the code is being used for infringing purposes. 17 US 512(c)(3).

true_religion 12y ago

You can. It's just that the actual owners will probably sue you for doing so against their work if they've given permission to legally access it and you try to revoke that with a DMCA.