5 ms·
sounds a bit like some form of identity theft. in any case, shouldn't he be suing the label selling his music? instead of all the stores they're selling it on?
by naringas 12y ago
sounds a bit like some form of identity theft.
in any case, shouldn't he be suing the label selling his music? instead of all the stores they're selling it on?
- ismyrnow 12y agoSounds like he wants to avoid paying a lawyer to do something that the big record labels can do with a click, that is, get a network to honor a DMCA takedown request. It shouldn't be so difficult for an individual to prevent someone else from profiting from their work. It sounds like yet another case where legislation favors the megacorps that put those laws there, claiming they were only for the good of the artists.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Veratyr 12y agoDMCA legally has to be honored regardless of the source, as long as the notice is complete. There's no "megacorp" favoring going on here. I'm sure if he actually issued DMCA takedown notices these listings would be gone within a day but since searching the post for DMCA shows zero results, it sounds like he hasn't done this. EDIT: And to be clear, you don't need an expensive lawyer to file a DMCA notice. There are plenty of free templates all over the internet you can print and mail.
- rpenm 12y agoHe mentions sending "cease and desist" letters - unclear if that means DMCA notices. He actually mentions receiving a DMCA notice for his own work despite providing proof of ownership to Youtube (but misspells DMCA, thus evading your search).
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- maxerickson 12y agoIdentity theft is bank-speak for fraud. This is a copyright violation, just as the article says. It is not particularly unreasonable to expect the stores to act faster than a court.