Philip on the DMCA

If you read Ginshu's reply fully and understand the implications of it you will see that the DMCA is potentially a griefer's paradise.

Take an example :

Party A files a DMCA against Party B
Party B files a counter claim

Party A is now given full details of that counter claim including full personal details of the counter claimer.
Party B is given nothing - they have no clue who is accusing them.

Party A can now take two choices :

1. Keep the details ( thankyou very much ) and proceed no further.
2. Get a court order and pursue the case in RL.

Whats wrong with that ?

Well, as the details of the counter claim are sent via email to the original filer - and as Ginshu mentions no checking other than clerical is performed - the original claimant need only have placed a current email address on the claim to freely receive party B's details.

If party A wishes to pursue the matter they have to subpoena LL to get the original DMCA, then subpoena the email provider etc etc to finally get the other parties details.

In the meantime party A can happily splash the details they have all over the Internet and say pretty much what they wish about the other person - knowing full well that with each detail posted the other party has to subpoena the relevant site to get details of the poster.

So if you want to know who someone is - just send in a DMCA - put on a good email address and any name, address and number you care to name - you will get the following goody bag :

1. The competitions item is removed for weeks whilst their counterclaim is addressed.
2. You get full details of your competition without the need of a lawyer or a court

It's a crime I hear you say -
yes - filing an erroneous DMCA is a crime, one which you and your lawyers will have to manually follow up.

Use of DMCA details outside of the terms of the DMCA is a crime -
yes - one which you and your lawyers will have to manually follow up.

Slander and harassment via third party sites using RL details is a crime -
yes - one which you and your lawyers will have to manually follow up.

You get to follow it all up at the expense of a lawyer and the courts - whilst the other party gets their goody bag for FREE.

So don't rely too heavily on the DMCA to protect you - when you get a take down order be prepared to go the full length with it ( including lawyers and the courts ) before you file a counter claim, or just write off your product.

Because if you counter claim you are just giving away your personal details.

You sound extremely paranoid. (Relax and take a breath) If you haven't stolen anyone's work, then I really don't think you have anything to worry about. If you don't want a 3rd party to receive your information...don't file a counter claim. Simple.

And for goodness sakes...don't put yourself in a position to have a DMCA complaint filed on you in the first place.

Whats wrong with that ?

In the meantime party A can happily splash the details they have all over the Internet and say pretty much what they wish about the other person

1. The competitions item is removed for weeks whilst their counterclaim is addressed.
2. You get full details of your competition without the need of a lawyer or a court

It's a crime I hear you say -
yes - filing an erroneous DMCA is a crime, one which you and your lawyers will have to manually follow up.

So don't rely too heavily on the DMCA to protect you

And for goodness sakes...don't put yourself in a position to have a DMCA complaint filed on you in the first place.

You're assuming here of course that it's the original creator who files the claim. Imagine this...

User A has a grievance with User B who is a moderately successful designer.
User A then files a DMCA claim against User B on a trumped up charge.
User B (the content creator) now has to file a counter claim or have their business destroyed, and even if they do, User A will have all their RL details.

It's not always as simple as "if you don't do wrong, you've nothing to worry about".

Interesting. But I think LL knows who the "original" designer would be. They know what was created before and after. If that was the case then I would hope LL would say "Wait a second. This box was created BEFORE that box. This claim isn't valid." Then it goes into the circular file.

Given that anyone can file a DMCA against anyone else and LL will only check for clerical errors - your statement means

Do not create or sell anything - ever

If you do you are in the position of someone being able to file a DMCA against you.

When I say don't put yourself in the position to have a DMCA complaint filed against you in the first place, I mean don't take other peoples stuff. Simple.

Don't put words in my mouth and exagerrate my statement to support your argument. If you did not understand those simple words, then ask for clarification.

When you make things up, you throw the converstation.

They can't check for one thing... and there doesn't have to be a stolen/copied item...

For clarity... you don't file it with LL... you file a DMCA in RL, and the court issues LL with a takedown notice which they MUST comply with. There's no checking. If the real creator wants the stuff reinstated, they have to answer the claim, with all that implies.

I understood your statement fully..

" And for goodness sakes...don't put yourself in a position to have a DMCA complaint filed on you in the first place."


Anyone who creates or sells content can have a DMCA filed against them.

That would be "putting yourself in a position to have a DMCA complaint filed on you"

Correct me if i am wrong.

The court doesn't come into the equation so soon. You file the DMCA and if the other person files a counter, you can then file suit. Do you think the judge will just say "OK here's your court order." without getting factual information from LL first? I think not.

If the person being sued thinks he/she is not infringing on Copyright, then they should show up at the court and argue their case. That's what I gather.

Correct

LL check nothing - not dates, id's , functionality - nothing - just that the form is correct.

Correct, the counter claimer has to show up at the court if the original person decides to take it that there. ( AT that stage the odds are evened as the counter claimer now knows who the other person is)

The jist of my point was however, that until it goes to court ( if at all ) the original filer has details of the counter claimer and the counter claimer has no details at all ( without legal action forcing LL to give them to you ).


This forces the financial burden onto the counter claimer who has to employ lawyers to get the original DMCA - whereas the originator of the DMCA gets the counter claim details for free.

Edit

And to answer Thornes question - you may be clean - matters not a jot.
I could file a DMCA on you today if I felt like it - you then spend 6 weeks talking to lawyers or removing your product.

Why would you want their details?

If the case does not go to court because the originator was filing with the explicit reason of removing a product and had no intention of filing a court complaint - I want their details so that I can file a complaint against an erroneous DMCA and all of the associated illegalities that go with it.

Edit again for thorne

Thorne - read Ginshu's post - LL WILL CHECK NOTHING

I could create an object today and claim an object that has been in world for 3 years infringes upon it - LL will not ( in fact cannot ) say NO to the DMCA unless it is presented in an incorrect form.

Ah! That's a good thing for the complaint originator! If you spend all your $ on an attorney and file suit, they can save their energy and wait for a notice that you have sued them and counter sue. Then you'd be doing all that for nothing AND you would not be able to say it was erroneous.

On the other hand, people may not have the money or resources to file suit. You cannot say it was erroneous just because they didn't sue you. Perhaps they decided it was too much trouble.

You just fortified my point.

Someone wants to take down a product they don't like - they file a DMCA

It is now the counter claimers responsibility ( financially ) to
protest against it.

The rational behind the originator of the DMCA being exactly as you said

"people may not have the money or resources to file suit. You cannot say it was erroneous just because they didn't sue you. Perhaps they decided it was too much trouble."

Problem solved - product is gone - it cost you nothing.

No I didn't. You are interpreting my statements and taking them way beyond their context. I think you are paranoid and thinking way too much about a subject you shouldn't have to think about dear. I think that it's one of those bridges you cross when you come to it.

Making assumptions and creating hypothetical situations confuses people. Let's just stick to the facts.

In legal matters, there usually is no cookie cutter solution. It can be different for every situation. When you actually HAVE a situation to address, you should take it up with LL or/and and attorney.

Cheers.