Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hollywood Studios Use DMCA To Censor Pirate Bay Documentary

Posted by timothy on from the we-don't-like-your-bits dept.

First time accepted submitter Aaron B Lingwood writes "As reported by TorrentFreak, Viacom, Paramount, Fox and Lionsgate have all asked Google to take down links pointing to the Pirate Bay documentary 'TPB-AFK.' The film, created by Simon Klose, is available for no cost and has already been watched by millions of people. The public response to this free release model has been overwhelmingly positive, but it's now meeting resistance from Hollywood, TPB's arch rival. Pirate Party Australia opines 'Hollywood is using takedown notices to censor Pirate Bay doco, is it incompetence or malice? Always hard to tell.' Whichever the answer, the system is definitely broken."

6 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article does not clarify how the DMCA is being used and what "Hollywood" is claiming as a violation.

    Really?

    Fox, with help from six-strikes monitoring company Dtecnet, asked Google to remove a link to TPB-AFK on Mechodownload. Paramount did the same with a link on the Warez.ag forums.

    Viacom sent at least two takedown requests targeting links to the Pirate Bay documentary on Mrworldpremiere and Rapidmoviez. Finally, Lionsgate jumped in by asking Google to remove a copy of TPB-AFK from a popular Pirate Bay proxy.

    Each of Fox, Viacom, and Lionsgate issued take down notices. They're essentially using false claims to issue DMCA take downs.

    Since they don't have to support or justify their claims, and there is no penalty for making false claims, they can suppress this by just telling people it's violating their copyright.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. Re:Thank you by zmaragdus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hope the Barbara Streisand effect snowballs this from here.

    --
    (((dB)))
  3. Re:Why? by faffod · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Speaking of "six strikes" how do we successfully petition for a new six strikes law: If you issue 6 invalid DMCA takedown notices you lose the right to issue takedown notices for the next 12 months.

  4. Re:Why? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, it already is. DMCA requests are issued under penalty of perjury. This doesn't actually matter because:
    1. It has to be a knowingly false takedown. Takedowns sent unintentionally (ie, by over-zealous bot) don't count.
    2. Most DMCA takedowns aren't actually formal DMCA notices, but rather 'polite requests' issued to hosts or service providers on the understanding that a full takedown will follow soon enough if the request isn't obeyed.
    3. No prosecutor has the slightest interest in enforcing this provision.

  5. Re:Its a Shame by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's an even bigger shame that they won't get arrested for perjury, which is exactly what filing a known false DMCA takedown notice is supposed to result in.

    Because all you have to do is claim incompetence and get off without penalty ... even if they did it on purpose, you'd probably never be able to prove that.

    Which is why there needs to be penalties for simply being wrong, otherwise it's free and they can do it all they like and later claim it was in error. They're certainly willing to destroy people's lives with their claims, they should have a lot more accountability for it.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  6. Re:Its a Shame by suutar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    complicit they may be, but shielded from any effect they most certainly are; that's the entire point of the DMCA safe harbor provision.