4 ms·

Sorry, but in the article, it mentioned a completely fraudulent complainant. While each host is definitely free to act as they please, if you pointed out that t

Sorry, but in the article, it mentioned a completely fraudulent complainant. While each host is definitely free to act as they please, if you pointed out that the original complaint was invalid (complainant info incorrect/could not get in touch) along with your counter-notice, we would reactivate your site immediately, as I imagine most reasonable companies would, since the original notice would be invalid. In the case where the complainant was legitimate, then yes, your content would be offline for 10 days. However, the complainant would also be guilty of perjury, which would carry a sentence of 2-4 years in California. So, if you're affected, then go to court and get them locked up. What is often overlooked is that without the DMCA the content host would be liable, so there would be no third party hosting on the Internet. Which pretty much means there would be no Internet as we know it today. Granted, it's not a perfect system, but it's also not the worst thing out there.

eli 17y ago
That's fine, but that means you are waiving your rights to the safe harbor provision and opening yourself up to a lawsuit, should the person choose to pursue it. I am not your lawyer, but I bet if you asked your lawyer he/she would recommend you always follow the 10 days rule. ...the complainant would also be guilty of perjury.. Not really. It's only perjury if the person writing the letter knew that they were lying. Which 1) is almost impossible to prove and 2) doesn't address the many, many people who send DMCA notices based on a genuine lack of knowledge about copyright. It is basically toothless. (Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been prosecuted for a bad DMCA claim?)
- drusenko 17y ago
  If the original notice doesn't have real contact information, it is invalid. Once pointed out that the notice is invalid, there is no reason and no liability in not following an invalid notice.

eli 17y ago

That's fine, but that means you are waiving your rights to the safe harbor provision and opening yourself up to a lawsuit, should the person choose to pursue it. I am not your lawyer, but I bet if you asked your lawyer he/she would recommend you always follow the 10 days rule. ...the complainant would also be guilty of perjury.. Not really. It's only perjury if the person writing the letter knew that they were lying. Which 1) is almost impossible to prove and 2) doesn't address the many, many people who send DMCA notices based on a genuine lack of knowledge about copyright. It is basically toothless. (Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been prosecuted for a bad DMCA claim?)

drusenko 17y ago
If the original notice doesn't have real contact information, it is invalid. Once pointed out that the notice is invalid, there is no reason and no liability in not following an invalid notice.