Slashdot Mirror
Google Pulls Open Source CoreAVC Project Over DMCA Complaint
rippe77 writes "Google has taken down the open-source project CoreAVC for Linux due to a DMCA complaint. The CoreAVC codec is a commercial high-definition H.264 DirectShow filter for windows provided by CoreCodec Inc.. The CoreAVC for Linux project provided various patches for Linux applications (mplayer, MythTV, xine) to use these DirectShow decoder filters in Linux. The takedown is quite controversial, as the CoreAVC project did not provide any copyrighted material — only the means to use the DirectShow filters in Linux."
(The takedown notice is not yet up at Chilling Effects, but Google's page has a link that will take you there when it is.)
They drop projects faster than Paris Hilton's panties in the face of legal threats. Version control over Freenet or the like would be a good start.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
If Google have received a notice then they have no option but to take down the site. Someone needs to file a counter notice, then Google will reinstate them.
Or post a bittorrent link with the word "banned by DMCA" in the title, ensuring it will NEVER go away and may in fact increase distribution by increasing demand.
It's 1st year economics: scarcity creates demand.
DMCA is a US law. It can only be enforced in the US. This is why, for example, piratebay.org has been able to get by ignoring DMCA take down notices for the past several years.
That said, I believe most EU countries, as well as Australia and recently Canada have laws similar to the DMCA. Other than Sweden I'm not sure of any specific countries that don't, though I'd venture to guess Russia, the middle east, india, china, the Koreas, africa, and most S american countries.
It is, but that doesn't mean that companies don't issue DMCA takedowns when they really are trying to resolve a trademark issue.
Yes, but if the only real issue is trademark and the issuer of the takedown notice does not own the copyright to the material, issuing a takedown notice is a crime. They are issued under penalty of perjury. So if you just don't like the name because you think it violates your trademark, issuing a takedown notice is not a good idea.
Wow, how many conspiracy theories you managed to roll into one. With the abundance of free hosting, it's easy to do hit-n-run copyright infringement. It means that one uploads clearly violating content for others to download as long as it lasts until it's taken down. Sending a "we believe you're infringing on our copyright" notice to those uploaders is futile because it'd go unanswered and would only extend the time from something is put up until it can be taken down, if the contact information is valid at all. I've seen plenty comments here on how they wish the SCO vs. IBM case (and Novell etc.) go faster, well it doesn't only work to your benefit.
In order to respond to how easy it's to put information up, they made it easy to take it down as well. I bet most DMCA takedowns go entirely unnoticed because whoever caused it never knew, cared or knew it was correct. We only hear about those cases where someone protests a takedown. It's really easy, there's no burden of proof or anything. All it takes is for someone to say "Hey I'm not a runner and I disagree with the takedown" and the ISPs must put it back up ASAP. I think that's a reasonable arrangement. The fact-checking could be a little better at times but some people here on slashdot want to put them in a catch 22 - without downloading a suspected song they don't have good enough proof, and if they do download suspected songs and it turns out they don't own it they're filthy pirates too.
If this is abuse, send a counter-notice. Get some precedent that this kind of code isn't covered by the DMCA. Then use that next time to show that they knew the takedown would be invalid, and take it from there. There's no need to go freaky over getting a DMCA notice. As far as I know, they can only send it once since the counternotice is basicly a STFU or sue response.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I forgive you for getting it wrong, since there keep being stories about "Canadian DMCA about to pass!!!!1" but as it turns out we've had really weak governments for the past while and thus in fact a full equivalent of the DMCA has yet to pass (unless I've missed something in the past month?). Key word being "yet", but it has never been a priority of the recent minority governments, nor have they quite had the time.
In terms of oppressive new legislation and expansion of corporate rights, Canada tends to lag behind the States just a tad, enough that in Canada people feel smug, all "oh, silly Americans. We would never trample the citizens in *our* country like that". And of course a Canadian from 10 years ago transported to today without having experienced the slowly rising boil would be aghast. But to degrees it's like that in many countries as of late.
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Only because the UN isn't a lawmaking body. If it were, you could expect their corruption to make corrupt politicians at the national level look like saints.
You'd think rather than just trying to take down CoreAVC-for-Linux immediately, CoreCodec might try to release a Linux version of the codec first.
~Jarik
Like the IOC, International Olympic Committee. Has there ever been a more corrupt organiztion on the face of the earth? The mafia (no such thing), the RIAA, the MPAA, lawyers as a whole and bankers... take them all and roll them up into one big ball and they've got NOTHING over the IOC.
And US citizens should consider a revolution against a system that can create things as insane as the DMCA.
Earlier I wanted to move to US, but with the incredible development of the law system and its abuse of control this is not an attractive option any more.
DRM is DefectiveByDesign , but DMCA is a law so insane that it is very hard to understand that a US revolution has not happened yet. The problem is probably that the coders who are aware about the problem is such a minority, despite that the hacker mentality would be to fix the problem with the system.
DMCA, The US patent system and laws, The Patriot Act and the removal of Habeas corpus as well as the invention of DRM and region coding on DVD as well as an insecure social security and an insane health insurance system makes US an unattractive country.
However, I like the US people and the US nature very much. I am an optimist (85% according a recent test) so I believe (and I got 100% in a self-esteem test...) that the US future can be fixed. I believe that those insane laws and inventions, as well as the social security system, medical security and also a fast , climate friendly, low energy communication system to replace the oil dependency can be developed within the next 20 years.
With good ideas, optimism and persistence, things will change to the better!
Hackers, coders, geeks, nerds, all over the world unite , there is a world that need fixing!
As I age, it becomes more apparent that Pink Floyd's "Welcome to the Machine" is really an unofficial anthem for a huge chunk of the population.
This is a statement with lots of acceleration, but little mass, and therefore negligible force.
Government accountability is about keeping decision-making power low in the hierarchy, where the decision-maker is more likely to live with the results (good or bad) of the decisions.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
It isn't covered by the DMCA because this isn't copyright infringement. No copyrighted information is being distributed. It's like if I started selling a tool that helped people install Goodyear tires on their cars. Then Goodyear sends me a DMCA takedown notice because they want to start selling a similar tool themselves (or my tool allows people to install the tires on a car/truck that Goodyear doesn't want people to install their tires on). They are just hoping to 'make it go away' because a takedown notice is quick and easy; even though this has nothing to do with copyright and/or content protection.
In this case, their codec isn't being distributed. Someone is providing a means to use the CoreAVC codec (which you download from the relevant company's website) with Linux media players by providing installation information and patches to make it work. This is no more an issue of copyright than Lexmark's "content protection" of their ink cartridges had anything to do with protecting copyrightable content.
I realize what you are trying to say about making it easier to take things down. My point is that too many lawyers/law firms utilize the DMCA when it doesn't even apply. And even though these takedown notices say that 'on penalty of perjury,' I don't see any of these lawyers or their clients being held to the fact that they are recklessly using these things like their are kids in a candy shop.
When we hear about people getting takedown notices from NBC just beceause the description on YouTube includes "Saturday Night Live" in it; even though the content is just someone on a webcam ranting about something relating to SNL, do you really think that they are doing their due diligence? I want to see them severly punished for tossing these things out like party favors. If their content is being infringed, then they should use it. That gives them no right to distrupt the lives of others because they can't be bothered to do a little investigation to make sure they are targeting the right people. Just because these people don't have monetary damages due to these takedowns should be irrelevant. It's a breach of ethics to do what they are doing, in my opinion.
First off a quickie status update: The user "BetaBoy" on coreavc forums has stated that CoreAVC has revoked the DCMA notice, and granted the projects lead developer permission to continue the project.
He has also stated that this was not so much about copyright infringement, but reverse engineering the codec without permission.
The DCMA takedown notice (which was just today posted to Chill Effects) references "links to copyrighted code". Yet Betaboy makes reference to this being about "reverse engineering without permission" - not copyright.
As a user of CoreAVC for linux, and a frequent visitor to the google code site, I can attest to the fact that NO CoreAVC code was contained there. It was (and is) a simple DirectShow Filter Host optimized for use with the codec. Thats it.
The bottom line here is this is as clear a case of reverse engineering for interoperability as there ever was (an activity PROTECTED and ALLOWED by the DCMA), and the DCMA take down notice was a perjured statement by not claiming illegal reverse engineering, but instead claiming copyrighted code.
The only good thing in this mess is the company did the right thing and apologised. The downside is they only did so after perjuring themselves, misusing the DCMA, and generally making an ass of themselves.
An overzealous employee? This was sent over the name of the company CEO, claiming to have been sent by him and it was in his name that the "under penalty of perjury" claim was made. Are there really employees there that are empowered to speak with his name, but make these kind of failures of judgment?