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

Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

owningyourshit.blogspot.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 58 posts

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#11

Post by Retric »

girlvinyl wrote: post #9

That is not how the DMCA works. All she has to do to file a counter claim is submit contact information of someone authorized to act on behalf of the works submitted, be that an attorney, friend or other business agent (the only requirement is a US address). Do you think Britney Spears puts her personal phone number on RIAA take down requests? The RIAA doesn't even own the copyrights they get taken down themselves, t…

Youtube obeys the DMCA rules, but also has a vastly streamlined process that's being somewhat openly abused that lacks anyway to effectively fight back.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#12

Post by girlvinyl »

porsupah wrote: post #8

The posting implies that the RL information required to make a counterclaim will be supplied to the party making the complaint. Is this indeed how YouTube's process works? If so, it certainly would seem to be problematic. A proxy, such as a shell company, or simply a friend, would seem to be plausible alternatives.

Youtube is simply following the DMCA here and this is precisely how the process works. If it worked any other way, the hosting provider (youtube in this case), would not enjoy safe harbors under the law. This aspect of the DMCA is specifically created to protect hosting companies from lawsuits involving automated upload of copyrighted material.

Essentially, Prima makes an accusation - "I swear your user is hosting my copyrighted material via your site." Host informs Secunda. Secunda has two options, either 1) Have the material removed by host or 2) submit sworn statement to host that they did not violate copyright and that Prima can come sue them at this address.

At that point the host re-instates the material in question and will remove it only upon receipt of initiation of a lawsuit.

This provision of the DMCA was created by the ISPs and specifically the cable companies because they didn't want to be liable for things their users did on their networks. This is the result.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#13

Post by girlvinyl »

porsupah wrote: post #8

The posting implies that the RL information required to make a counterclaim will be supplied to the party making the complaint. Is this indeed how YouTube's process works? If so, it certainly would seem to be problematic. A proxy, such as a shell company, or simply a friend, would seem to be plausible alternatives.

Also, to add: Yes, you are completely right. Any rights holder can designate an agent to work on this on their behalf.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#14

Post by icebraining »

knowtheory wrote: post #3

Regardless of the truth of this woman's specific claims... This seems like the point at which youtube has to make decisions about who their automated takedown system actually serves. Reddit's CEO refers to Reddit as akin to a city-state and himself as mayor. Youtube has essentially the same problems in governance. They have to juggle a host of competing interests ranging from free speech rights, to copyright infringe…

I'd say they're on the side that doesn't expose them to a massive lawsuit by media companies.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#15

Post by devicenull »

knowtheory wrote: post #3

Regardless of the truth of this woman's specific claims... This seems like the point at which youtube has to make decisions about who their automated takedown system actually serves. Reddit's CEO refers to Reddit as akin to a city-state and himself as mayor. Youtube has essentially the same problems in governance. They have to juggle a host of competing interests ranging from free speech rights, to copyright infringe…

What exactly do you want Youtube to do? Under the DMCA, they don't get to decide what content is infringing or not.

The requirement to provide your name/address is so the DMCA complaints can be handled in a court, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#16

Post by engtech »

__alexs wrote: post #5

Transfer the ownership to EFF and put their info on the form?

Interesting idea. I wonder if anyone has stepped up to prevent the chilling effect of DMCA takedown notices?

It seems like a non-profit could handle this role where they act as a proxy where the victim of the notice asserts they have copyright, sends the information to the proxy and then the proxy acts on their behalf?

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#17

Post by Symmetry »

girlvinyl wrote: post #10
chris_wot wrote: post #7

Perhaps they should refer to 17 USC § 512 (f). She can sue for misrepresentation. Frankly, I'm surprised that nobody has! I'm sure if she wanted she could extract a lot of money. It would sure stop frivilous takedown requests, too!

The EFF famously sued a DMCA troll, it was quite dramatic. https://www.eff.org/cases/diehl-v-crook

Wow, I didn't know that aspect of the DMCA had ever been used. Do you know of any other cases of that happening?

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#18

Post by roel_v »

knowtheory wrote: post #4
peterwwillis wrote: post #2

I wish I could care about this, but the 'doxx' and lulz and generally childish writing make me assume this is another case of internet entitlement issues.

Regardless of your personal feelings for this woman, do you agree that this is an exploit that youtube exposes where attackers may be able to get personal information about a youtube account holder?

Regardless of what the (obscure) legal reality is in this matter, do you agree that this woman presents her case in a juvenile way, and shows a general lack of understanding of the real-world procedures (as opposed to how keyboard warriors imagine things are or should be) in matters like this, and an apparent unwillingness to learn about them, to a point where it makes her seem unsuitable to voice an informed opinion about it, and certainly ill-suited to be the flag bearer for a contentious topic like this one?

See how that works?

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#19

Post by DanBC »

knowtheory wrote: post #4
peterwwillis wrote: post #2

I wish I could care about this, but the 'doxx' and lulz and generally childish writing make me assume this is another case of internet entitlement issues.

Regardless of your personal feelings for this woman, do you agree that this is an exploit that youtube exposes where attackers may be able to get personal information about a youtube account holder?

No.

You put the details of your legal representative on that form.

Re: Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes

#20

Post by zokier »

girlvinyl wrote: post #12
porsupah wrote: post #8

The posting implies that the RL information required to make a counterclaim will be supplied to the party making the complaint. Is this indeed how YouTube's process works? If so, it certainly would seem to be problematic. A proxy, such as a shell company, or simply a friend, would seem to be plausible alternatives.

Youtube is simply following the DMCA here and this is precisely how the process works. If it worked any other way, the hosting provider (youtube in this case), would not enjoy safe harbors under the law. This aspect of the DMCA is specifically created to protect hosting companies from lawsuits involving automated upload of copyrighted material. Essentially, Prima makes an accusation - "I swear your user is hosting my…

I think this is not DMCA request. Google has it's own takedown mechanism, which afaik what this is about.
Post reply on HN