Responding to DMCA Infringement Claims

An anonymous submitter sent in this: "This isn't exactly a news item, but it seems appropriate in light of the current debate over copyrights. TechTV has a useful story on their site about how to respond to a notification from your ISP that someone is claiming you're infringing on their copyright. Basically, it's a do-it-yourself letter that you can use to make the person or organization alleging infringement properly document their claim, as required under the DMCA. This isn't going to save anyone who's actually infringing, but it might prevent you from being railroaded by an aggressive complainant and/or a nervous ISP. And you might still get screwed in the end, but at least you can make everyone follow the correct procedures, even if they're incredibly biased at the moment." Under the DMCA, the copyright holder sends a notice to you/your ISP and states, basically, that you are posting some of their copyrighted material and demanding that the ISP take it down. We've seen many instances where this is a false or bogus claim. Dave Touretzky, whose name ought to be familiar to slashdot readers from the DeCSS cases, made up this guide to writing a response letter demanding that your ISP reinstate the materials. Very useful, well worth bookmarking.

Comments

Joint ownership of content as a deterrent

[Rares Marian]

Pay multiple people to be copyright researchers.
They assume responsibility of copyright matters by being joint owners. Now you split them into different groups. Those familiar with tablature issues, those familiar with recording issues, etc.

So now if there's an attack from legalspace they have to contend with having to sue multiple people in different cases on different counts just to shut your site down.

Here's my reply:

[SaxMaster]

As Eric Cartman stated so brilliantly, I paraphrase:

"Would you like to suck my balls, Mr. Valenti/Ms. Rosen/other cartel leader?"

How to respond to DMCA Infringement Claims

[AntiNorm]

(Only if you're not infringing...if you're blatantly infringing, such as by running a warez ISO site, you deserve what you get)

1. Buy yourself a good lawyer.
2. Find out which judge the complainants plan to use.
3. Find out what price the complainants are willing to pay for the judge.
4. Offer the judge 10% more.
5. Recoup the cost of the judge as part of the settlement -- remember, he who pays the most wins.

---
The AOL-Time Warner-Microsoft-Intel-CBS-ABC-NBC-Fox corporation:

So you wanna go to court?

[gregorious]

I handle DMCA copyright infringement claims for a university. A counter-claim is most justified if you're quite certain that the claimant is NOT the copyright holder. The form-letter counter-claim might encourage people who really have a legitimate case, for example a journalist or academic quotation.

But beware! Sending a counter-claim to your ISP releases the ISP from confidentiality policies to the extent that the ISP must turn over info identifying you so that the claimant can take you to court. The claimant can then formally tell the ISP that they are proceeding to take this to court, and the ISP is then obliged to take down the disputed materials anyway, until a timeout.

If you are really infringing copyright, you don't want to go to court. Mainly, the claimant will require your lawyer (you do have a lawyer, don't you?) to come to their court (often in NYC or LA for record companies and publishers) at times of their choosing.

You don't want to go to court, period. If you feel you had a Fair Use or other case, try frank negotiation with the copyright holder. Do a cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment before you file a counter-claim. Bluff and bluster could be expensive.

I'm a techie, not a lawyer. I like this part of the DMCA, because it basically safeguards rights on both sides while keeping the ISP out of court, so long as we follow DMCA procedure.