Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

juliareda.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#21

Post by ttwtf »

From her Webpage: "All member states of the EU have to welcome refugees and support each other in this task. We want to abolish the border security agency Frontex. We must ensure safe entry for all those who wish to claim their right of asylum in the EU."

It is people like her who kill Europe. By letting huge amounts of people with low educational background, tribal societies, low threshold for violence, different attitude towards women flood Europe you create the exact same problems in Europe that made these people leave their countries.

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#22

Post by colejohnson66 »

kd5bjo wrote: post #16

The article doesn't mention anything about filing a counter-notice [1] to get her content relisted, which the law requires be processed just as blindly as the takedown. While I'm all for shedding light on abuses of the current system, the implication that she has no recourse is simply false. In fact, I'm surprised that the widespread DMCA claim abuse hasn't spawned some quick-and-easy counter-notice services to help…

The problem with takedowns (at least on) YouTube (for example) is that ContentID is not DMCA

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#23

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

mavhc wrote: post #4

https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/16954705 err, how is this even legal, doesn't DMCA have provisions for punishing false claims?

> doesn't DMCA have provisions for punishing false claims?

Not really effective ones. That's part of the problem. I believe the perjury penalty only applies if the request was made intentionally in bad faith, not for negligence.

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#24

Post by Klathmon »

kd5bjo wrote: post #16

The article doesn't mention anything about filing a counter-notice [1] to get her content relisted, which the law requires be processed just as blindly as the takedown. While I'm all for shedding light on abuses of the current system, the implication that she has no recourse is simply false. In fact, I'm surprised that the widespread DMCA claim abuse hasn't spawned some quick-and-easy counter-notice services to help…

In a lot of cases the problem is that they aren't actual DMCA claims, so you lose the protections.

If they kindly ask a company to take it down, you have no recourse, and they have no risk.

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#25

Post by cosmojg »

imhoguy wrote: post #11

This is sad state of matters that I have to fallback more often to DuckDuckGo and Russian Yandex to discover public information which is censored by Google and big Co-s. Forbidden bits? (I know Yandex may be in the other side of censorship spectrum too). Isn't it a high time for a decentralized federated search-engine?

Have you tried SearX?

https://searx.me

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#26

Post by c3o »

kd5bjo wrote: post #16

The article doesn't mention anything about filing a counter-notice [1] to get her content relisted, which the law requires be processed just as blindly as the takedown. While I'm all for shedding light on abuses of the current system, the implication that she has no recourse is simply false. In fact, I'm surprised that the widespread DMCA claim abuse hasn't spawned some quick-and-easy counter-notice services to help…

She does refer to this here:

> Each individual author must actively put up a fight to restore the findability of their free speech.

That's still an unacceptable system. Apart from shifting the burden of proof, you're not even notified when your pages are de-listed, so how are you supposed to know when to send such a notice?

Also, from your link:

> sending a counter-notice makes non-U.S. residents give up a powerful argument they would otherwise have -- namely, that a U.S. court does not have the authority to render a judgment against them. For these reasons, non-U.S. residents may not want to send a counter-notice

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#28

Post by oliwarner »

mavhc wrote: post #4

https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/16954705 err, how is this even legal, doesn't DMCA have provisions for punishing false claims?

The claim has to be wilfully and knowingly false.

It's essentially toothless because it's near impossible to prove, and it takes all responsibility off the filer.

Re: Criticisms of EU plans for copyright censorship machines removed from Google

#30

Post by testvox »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #23
mavhc wrote: post #4

https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/16954705 err, how is this even legal, doesn't DMCA have provisions for punishing false claims?

> doesn't DMCA have provisions for punishing false claims? Not really effective ones. That's part of the problem. I believe the perjury penalty only applies if the request was made intentionally in bad faith, not for negligence.

Its worse than that, the only part of a DMCA notice that is made under penalty of perjury is that the filer is authorized to represent the holder of the copyright being claimed (so really it just protects big owners of copyright from people impersonating them). The only real recourse for false claims is to sue for damages, and even then the bar is high. You need to prove damages and that the claim was made in bad faith, not merely negligently.
Post reply on HN