11–20 of 197 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a 512 notice, so a counternotice is not possible.
Really? I thought that every dmca notice was counterable. GitHub simply took down the repo with no recourse? That doesn’t sound right.
The recourse is filing a declaratory judgement to establish the legality of the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a 512 notice, so a counternotice is not possible.
Really? I thought that every dmca notice was counterable. GitHub simply took down the repo with no recourse? That doesn’t sound right.
[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/github-youtube-dl-take...
Any reason why youtube-dl hasn't filed a counter-takedown notice?
They might decide not to counter-notice, because there's a big trap in the DMCA counter-notice: as far as I know, for a DMCA counter-notice to be valid, the one doing the counter-notice must agree to be bound to the jurisdiction of an USA court. If the youtube-dl author is not from the USA (I think he's from the EU), that would expose him to legal risk.
(As a non-USA person, to me this is the most evil part of the DMCA take-down system: even a defective DMCA notice leads to a dilemma, either you keep the content offline, or you risk being sued in a foreign jurisdiction you have no control over. This is also why I believe one should always prefer to host in one's own country, so that any dispute can be resolved by the local courts.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? I thought that every dmca notice was counterable. GitHub simply took down the repo with no recourse? That doesn’t sound right.
Every notice is. This wasn't a notice. The recourse is filing a declaratory judgement to establish the legality of the code.
Which is expensive relative to the resources of some individuals doing this as a hobby, so some kind of legal defense fund may be in order.
Of course, the other option is to put enough pressure on Github/Microsoft to get them to be the ones to defend it, since it's not that expensive relative to the resources of a trillion dollar corporation, and they could quite plausibly have more to gain in positive PR with developers (or in avoiding continued negative PR) than they pay to the lawyers they probably already have on staff.
We shouldn't forgive companies who do the wrong thing on issues like this, because the cost of people not forgiving them is a major incentive for them not to do the wrong thing.
Any reason why youtube-dl hasn't filed a counter-takedown notice?
If the original creator endorses a fork, is he making himself liable? - not sure what happens if you repost after a takedown notice.
And the involvement of the law, and the publicity will lead overall to self-censoring, as most devs won't want to deal with this...
Doesn't seem to me to making things worse for the RIAA
Does one imagine that the RIAA is substantially worried about this? I don't. I'm sure they see it as a total win.
Agreed. If the people behind these take-down requests actually ended piracy, they'd be out of a job.
When they are done with open piracy they will move to other stuff.
Did you whistle a copyrighted tune in the elevator? You owe us money now.
(If you think I'm joking, look at Japan who jails musicians for 10+ years for playing covers at parties without paying royalties)