Slashdot Mirror
Hotfile Sues Warner Bros Over Abuse of Takedown Tool
schwit1 writes with a piece in Torrent Freak about ongoing litigation between Hotfile and a few movie studios. From the article: "Hotfile has sued Warner Bros. for fraud and abuse. Hotfile accuses the movie studio of systematically abusing its anti-piracy tool by taking down hundreds of titles they don't hold the copyrights to, including open source software. Among other things, Hotfile is looking for damages to compensate the company for the losses they suffered."
Near the end of the article it is mentioned that files taken down by the tool were replaced with links to legally procure similar works from Warner Bros.
The use of tools was a significant early step in the development of humankind. Maybe, in as little as a couple million years, the big studios will be ready to be part of civilized society.
I would really like someone to hold them to that.
Yes, copyright infringement is illegal. But, stating under penalty of perjury that you own a copyrighted work, and clearly not having checked to see if you do ... well, that should be treated with some pretty harsh legal consequences. In fact, maybe someone can spin it so that the Warner pays the statutory damages as if they pirated the work ... what's that, like 9 trillion dollars per offending file?
Hopefully Hotfile gets some traction on this one.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Near the end of the article it is mentioned that files taken down by the tool were replaced with links to legally procure similar works from Warner Bros.
Just to clarify any misunderstandings about what this meant(Emphasis mine):
Hotfile suspects that the overbroad takedowns were not only an attempt to prevent copyright infringement, but also a scheme to make profits. Warner proposed to Hotfile an affiliate deal where content that was taken down would be replaced with links to movie stores where users could buy Warner movies. More takedowns thus means more potential revenue.
"Warner had an economic motive to make these misrepresentations. As noted above, in early 2010, Warner proposed a business arrangement with Hotfile whereby Warner sought to present ecommerce links to Hotfile users who might purchase a Warner file for Warner's profit in place of links that Warner had deleted using its SRA."
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Make there be a statutory damage value and cause of action for each false DMCA takedown which is the same ($150,000 ?) as for each instance of copyright infringement.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
The DMCA gives copyright holders the power to take down content based on little more than their say so. It is therefore very important that making bogus DMCA claims carry penalties commensurate with the damage (both moral and monetary) suffered by those whose content is taken down by means of fraudulent or negligent copyright claims.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Also, Warner Bros should loose their rights under the DMCA to issue takedown requests at all, since they clearly cannot be trusted to issue valid requests.
I wonder to what extent Lenz v. Universal and the unclean hands doctrine can be extrapolated to keep a service provider's safe harbor intact when faced with takedown requests from someone suspected of perjury.
from the faq:
Q.Can I search the Hotfile server for certain files?
A. No. Hotfile protects the privacy of our users. Only the person storing a file on Hotfile gets the download link. That person decides who should have access to the link. A file can only be downloaded if the download link details are known.
it should read:
Q.Can I search the Hotfile server for certain files?
A. Yes. Hotfile do not protect the privacy of our users. All major Hollywood Companies get acces to your download link. These companys decides who should have access to the link. They can download and look at your private files as they wish. They can choose to delete your files.
from: http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/responding-dmca-takedown-notice-targeting-your-content,br.,br. The highlighted part:
Section 512(f) of the DMCA creates liability for knowingly making false claims in a DMCA takedown notice or counter-notice. See 17 U.S.C. 512(f). So, if you claim in a counter-notice that your content does not infringe the complaining party's copyrighted work while knowing this to be false, then the copyright owner can win damages from you, including court costs and attorneys' fees stemming from your wrongful counter-notice. Note, however, that this provision also works against a person or company sending a wrongful takedown notice. If someone claims in a takedown notice that you are infringing their copyrighted material while knowing this to be false, then you can win damages from them in a lawsuit. In recent years, the targets of wrongful takedowns have fought back and won damages and favorable settlements from individuals and companies sending bogus takedown notices. For instance, in Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc., 337 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (N.D. Cal. 2004), two students and their ISP sued voting machine manufacturer Diebold after it tried to use DMCA takedown notices to disable access to Internet postings of the company's leaked internal email archive. The court granted summary judgment to the students and ISP on their claim, finding that portions of the email archive were so clearly subject to the fair use defense that "[n]o reasonable copyright holder could have believed that [they] were protected by copyright." According to the EFF, Diebold subsequently agreed to pay $125,000 in damages and fees to settle the lawsuit. For another example, see Crook v. 10 Zen Monkeys in our legal threats database. Someone who has sent a baseless takedown notice about your content may be more inclined to back off if you remind him or her about section 512(f) of the DMCA, in addition to sending a counter-notice.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's