6 ms·
17 U.S. Code § 512(f) Misrepresentations.— Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section— (1) that material or activity is infri
by dangrossman 12y ago
17 U.S. Code § 512(f)
Misrepresentations.— 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.
There probably exist civil law remedies outside the DMCA's protections as well. Tortious interference, slander of title, something that might stick given the specific circumstances and how good your lawyers are. IANAL.
- DannyBee 12y agoNobody has successfully gotten anyone fined/real damages for this provision yet. Partially because it requires knowing misrepresentation, not just negligent or even grossly negligent misrepresentation.
- teddyh 12y agoYes, that law also says that there should be a penalty. The parent poster is complaining about the fact that there isn’t any penalty. (In practice, that is.)
- otterley 12y agoThe standard is one of actual knowledge -- so it's really difficult to enforce when a computer program is most likely generating the lists, and probably not being reviewed in detail.
- sarciszewski 12y agoShouldn't automated takedowns be considered null and void? If so, is there a way to allow firms that are known to send bogus automated takedowns be blacklisted? (i.e. you can always ignore them, if they try to push anything, you just point to their history of automated processes) Something. Anything. To discourage this behavior. To hit them where it hurts. (The wallet.)
- TeMPOraL 12y agoThey should. But MAFIAA loves automated takedowns, and they don't care if they're valid either. So it's likely not going to happen.
- sarciszewski 12y agoFuck the MAFIAA, they're not the only one who matters. This is a problem for any US company.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoWell, "any US company" can't coordinate well enough with "any other US company" to bribe the Congress and fix it, therefore they fall prey to the ones that can coordinate to maintain the status quo.
- sarciszewski 12y agoTrue. I guess the only recourse is to revolt, roll out the guillotine, and solve the RIAA/MPAA problem the old fashioned way.
- johnlbevan2 12y agoTried to find out what IANAL meant, but Google had no results as all records with certain substrings had been removed at Wicked's request.