[flagged]
Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
11–20 of 62 posts
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#12We need strict liability for false DMCA notices plus automatic award of attorney fees in a successful 512(f) case. Would fix 95% of the abuse.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
Seems like a good idea to me. Are you thinking of small or large values for $X and $Y?
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? If the escrowed money doesn't go to the parties, then there's no incentive from either side to consider the other side's escrow when determining their actions. Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out. I think you need a lot more details on what happens in each scenario here.
The circumstances where the escrow IS NOT returned would be the forfeitures. You have to read between the lines since the comment only specifies when escrow IS returned.
So, alleged copyright owner loses escrow when a counter claim is filed. The accused loses escrow when a lawsuit is filed.
This detail isn't as important as the overall result. Those who engage in mass DMCA abuse will directly lose money as a result.
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#14As a forum of tech employees, the EFF is probably the closest we have to an advocacy group. Donate money, donate time.
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? If the escrowed money doesn't go to the parties, then there's no incentive from either side to consider the other side's escrow when determining their actions. Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out. I think you need a lot more details on what happens in each scenario here.
The circumstances where the escrow IS NOT returned would be the forfeitures. You have to read between the lines since the comment only specifies when escrow IS returned. So, alleged copyright owner loses escrow when a counter claim is filed. The accused loses escrow when a lawsuit is filed. This detail isn't as important as the overall result. Those who engage in mass DMCA abuse will directly lose money as a result.
[deleted]
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? If the escrowed money doesn't go to the parties, then there's no incentive from either side to consider the other side's escrow when determining their actions. Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out. I think you need a lot more details on what happens in each scenario here.
> In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited?
When a counter-notice is filed (and so the material at issue is put back online) but a lawsuit is never filed the $X would be forfeit.
When a counter-notice is filed and a lawsuit is filed then both $X and $Y would be forfeit.
> Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out.
I would imagine $X and $Y being small enough dollar amounts that this maneuver wouldn't be worthwhile.
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#17We need strict liability for false DMCA notices plus automatic award of attorney fees in a successful 512(f) case. Would fix 95% of the abuse.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
How would that be enforceable on parties outside the US?
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
Seems like a good idea to me. Are you thinking of small or large values for $X and $Y?
That is the question. If the dollar amount is too low then big companies could afford to abuse the process but if the dollar amount is too high it would be difficult for individual content owners to assert their rights. I was thinking $100 to file an initial claim and $50 to file a counter-claim but I really don't know.
Or perhaps a mechanism where the cost to file an initial claim goes up to $1000 after a person/entity has filed a certain number of claims for the year?
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? If the escrowed money doesn't go to the parties, then there's no incentive from either side to consider the other side's escrow when determining their actions. Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out. I think you need a lot more details on what happens in each scenario here.
> In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? When a counter-notice is filed (and so the material at issue is put back online) but a lawsuit is never filed the $X would be forfeit. When a counter-notice is filed and a lawsuit is filed then both $X and $Y would be forfeit. > Or worse - someone could file a suit and dismiss it later just to force escrow to be paid out. I would imagine $X and $Y being small…
Sounds too harsh for the first, unless $X is very low. What if you learn from the counternotice that they're not going to be able to be able to pay a judgement?
And the second is also too harsh - you should have the opportunity to defend yourself in court, not automatically pay money just for standing up for your rights.
Re: Internet Users of All Kinds Should Be Concerned by a New Copyright Office Report
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if a system like this could work to prevent abuse: - Alleged copyright owners pay $X to file a DMCA notice - Accused copyright infringers pay $Y to file a counter-notice - Funds are held in escrow - If the accused doesn't file a counter-notice within 10 days the copyright owner gets their $X back - If a counter-notice is filed and the alleged copyright owner doesn't file suit within 90 days, no matter the re…
Seems like a good idea to me. Are you thinking of small or large values for $X and $Y?
I think appropriate values would be whatever it costs to file a lawsuit in the relevant court, plus a transaction fee for the escrow service.
DMCA takedown notices were sold as a way to get quicker action than filing for an injunction, but they should not be usable as an alternative to a real lawsuit. If you're sending a takedown notice, you should be prepared to follow up with a lawsuit, including being on the hook for the fees.
I think it would also be nice for abandoned takedown notices (ie. where the counter-notice isn't contested with a lawsuit) to be public record entered on a court docket. That way, abusers of the system can be more readily identified and tracked.