[nylug-talk] effective DMCA tricks

[Michael Sims]

On Friday 02 May 2003 10:15 am, joe wrote:

> I stopped the thieves and shut them own. Stopped them from profiting
> from my work. Exposed them in public, by name, as thieves. What better
> result would you want?

I asked what benefit you got.  In what way were you better off after 
doing so, compared to beforehand.  More money, more fame, more power, 
what?

> But please don't leap to assuming that just because I haven't
> mentioned it that I am not pursuing a legal actions for damages, too.
> That is not in discussion because the topic is the DMCA.

Ah, but this is traditional copyright law.  In fact, you've injured 
yourself by making the publisher take down the materials you allege were 
yours: your damages would have been higher had they left it up.

> Have you read the DMCA?

Once or twice.  (Note for the humor-impaired: I've studied the DMCA, 
written articles on it, given presentations about it, etc.)

> Do you see the checks and balances in it?

Not really, no.

> As
> for "established judicial procedures," I hope you considered my
> explanation of how they work - or should I say, do not work?

Your initial piece included no effort to use the traditional legal 
system - calling up the publisher is not adequate.

And yet you now say you are bringing a suit under traditional copyright 
law - why, if it doesn't work?

> Someone's abuse of a law that protects the rights of thousands of
> creators does not not necessarily mean that the law is bad.

I'm sure that many of the people lynched were in fact guilty, too.

> Surely you are not suggesting that abuse of the system by the COS is
> reason to cashier the entire "established judicial system."  So why
> then is it grounds for throwing out the entire DMCA? Baby? Bathwater?

Lawyers who go before a judge making frivolous claims can be sanctioned, 
even disbarred.  This provides a strong incentive for them not to abuse 
the system too greatly.  There is no such check on DMCA takedown notices.

Since no one here seems to have paid much attention to notice and 
takedown abuses, please, by all means, conduct your own experiment!  Do 
the following:

1) Create a text file.  Give it a name such as 
"Madonna-Like_a_Virgin.mp3" or any other name you wish which might be 
confused with a copyrighted work.  Share this file with the world, via 
web page, file-sharing network, or whatever.
2) Wait until your internet connection is cut off.
3) Attempt to file a counter-notification of some sort.  See how far it 
gets you.

Please take note of:

a) how long your internet connection remains down (perhaps permanently)
b) how many hours you have to spend on the phone to find out what 
happened, who sent the notice, and how to provide a counter-notification


> No it's not. I want a just society. I'm too much a left-wing activist
> to even consider allowing anyone to be a law unto himself.  That's not
> how I acted.

Of course it is.

> I acted within the letter of the law and got a just result.

The fact of the matter is, you would have gotten the same result by 
threatening any sort of legal action - your use of the phrase "DMCA" did 
nothing to help or to harm you in getting those materials taken down, 
you just needed to get the attention of the corporate legal counsel.


-- 
Michael Sims