Slashdot Mirror


YouTube Reposts Anti-Scientology Videos

Ian Lamont writes "YouTube has reposted anti-Scientology videos and reinstated suspended YouTube accounts after receiving thousands of apparently bogus DCMA take-down notices. Four thousand notices were sent to YouTube last Thursday and Friday by American Rights Counsel, LLC. After YouTube users responded with counter-notices, many of the videos were reposted. It turns out that the American Rights Counsel had no copyright claim on the videos, and the group may not even exist, although the text of the DCMA notices have been linked to a Wikipedia editor. While filing a false DMCA notice is a criminal offense, prosecution in these cases rarely comes about."

4 of 435 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Racial Bigotry by ThatGuyJon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes. Did you miss the big scrolling letters running across the screen?
    The odd thing about Scientology is although that is what they believe, Scientologists are only told it after they have spent an awful lot of time and money on Scientology.

    --
    I must be new here...
  2. Re:Southpark's Scientology Video by schlick · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    "It's because they're stupid, that's why. That's why everybody does everything." -Homer Simpson
  3. Re:E-meter videos? by smolloy · · Score: 5, Informative

    An e-meter isn't a voltmeter, it's a potentiometer (it measures resistance not voltage). It's based on a Wheatstone bridge design, and is a very sensitive way to measure the resistance between the probes. Since hydration levels, stress, sweat, etc., can all change the resistivity of human skin, an e-meter will measure these changes, which can then be (fraudulently) be interpreted as being of religious significance.

    It's nothing more than a half-assed lie-detector.

  4. Re:Should be worth pressing charges. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

    A DMCA take-down notice includes a sworn statement indicating that you are acting on behalf of the copyright holder. If they were sent by someone else then this is a case of perjury, and since they were sent by a law firm there should be a simple trail to identify the responsible party. Unless they were sent by someone pretending to be a lawyer, in which case that's two illegal actions.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News