Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NFL Caught Abusing the DMCA

Posted by kdawson on from the poorly-chosen-victim dept.

Implied Oral Consent writes "You know how the NFL puts up those notices before every game saying 'This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience, and any other use of this telecast or of any pictures, descriptions or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited?' Well, Ars Technica is reporting that Wendy Seltzer thought that that was over-reaching and posted a video of the notice on YouTube. Predictably, the NFL filed a DMCA Take Down notice on the clip. But Ms. Seltzer knows her rights, so she filed a DMCA Counter Notice. This is when the NFL violated the DMCA, by filing another Take Down notice instead of taking the issue to court — their only legitimate option, according to the DMCA. Unfortunately for the NFL, Ms. Seltzer is a law professor, an EFF lawyer, and the founder of Chilling Effects. Oops!"

2 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Whistle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Illegal procedure is a five-yard penalty.


    If you were in the NBA you would receive a technical for arguing the call.

    Zebra call being incorrect matches the storyline, ie here the NFL Lawyers and YouTube were the Zebras.

    Lawyers in striped uniforms would please lots of people, with the stripes horizontal instead of vertical of course.

    AC intercepts passed jokes, races downfield listening for whistles and watching Mod Zebra's for penalty flags....trips, landing funny bone first under cheerleader's bench. AC looks up, remembers this is Slashdot when he sees all the cheerleaders are male geeks and nerds. AC starts searching YouTube so he can file a take down notice if any video of this reaches there.
  2. Here's a great idea by Zorque · · Score: 0, Troll

    How about we constantly bash a law for being unfair, unnecessary, and convoluted, and then turn around and expect a corporation to follow it to the letter! Even better, let's put forth that it was wrong of them to disobey this law we think is unjust, and side with a woman whose only purpose in the actions was to goad the NFL into suing her. All this so that she could claim they were breaking a law: something she had already done (the same law, as a matter of fact) and should be responsible for. This is a non-story in my opinion.