Twitter sidesteps DMCA law ignoring notices sent via email
As many of you know all too well, successfully removing your pirated work from online sites is a...
Read MoreAs many of you know all too well, successfully removing your pirated work from online sites is a...
Read MoreU.S. based companies assist these efforts by literally providing cover for their illegal piracy business while pocketing their own dirty money in the process.
Read MoreThe DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) was signed into law nearly 20 years ago….yet here we are today, same old tired law but with an online ecosystem vastly different from what existed 2 decades ago. Despite this, no one in Congress seems in any great hurry to update law and as they drag their feet, creative artists continue to pay the price.
For creators trying to safeguard their work from online theft this leaves them with only one option, the DMCA takedown notice. This antiquated process works ok in very limited instances, but for most filmmakers (and musicians) dealing with a large volume of infringements, it’s like using an umbrella to stay dry beneath Niagara Falls. Not only is it inadequate, but the truth is– it’s a joke. Why? Because the DMCA’s safe harbor provision provides loopholes allowing many of tech’s piracy enablers–U.S. based companies play a significant role in allowing pirates entrepreneurs to pimp their stolen content across the globe–to sidestep any legal liability and happily accept the tainted profits filling their cash drawers.
Read MoreIt’s that time of year. The time of year where Google rolls out a shiny update on its “How Google Fights Piracy” report. Google began the tradition in 2013. At the time I noted that Google’s claim to be a “leader” in the fight against piracy was its first mistake. With today’s update, it appears the Silicon Valley giant hasn’t backed down from that dubious claim (or many others).
Katie Oyama, Senior Policy Counsel, Google asserts that, “We take protecting creativity online seriously, and we’re doing more to help battle copyright-infringing activity than ever before.” Yet, in spite of Oyama’s rosy quote, in truth the reality (for creators) battling online piracy continues to be a bleak one.
Read MoreI’ve written about Google’s laborious and time-consuming DMCA takedown maze, a process that forces creators to find, then fill out cumbersome online forms. I’ve also written about the fact that Google makes it difficult, if not impossible, to find the email address for its DMCA Agent–in apparent violation of the law’s requirements.
Read MorePoor Google….bad, bad copyright holders….that’s essentially the subtext beneath headlines that scream, “Google received over 75 million copyright takedown requests in February-The company is processing over 100,000 links each and every hour.” My response–why not try a different approach?
Read MoreAs the U.S. Copyright Office solicits public comments for its study to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the safe harbor provisions contained in section 512 of the (DMCA) Digital Millennium Copyright Act it’s worth examining how Google–the Sugar Daddy of pirate purveyors– openly skirts the law to obstruct the process at every turn.
Of course Google would have you believe it’s the victim when it comes to enforcing the DMCA. Its flacks regularly bleat about the millions of DMCA notices the company processes each week–a small price for profiting (indirectly) off the lucrative myriad of online exchanges it provides for pirated content. As I’ve written before, Google’s millions of takedowns is a “mess of its own making.”
The relationship between the tech industry and content creators off all stripes has long been strained when it comes to the issue of protecting copyright. Whether it’s asking Google to do a better job excluding search results that lead to pirated content, or demanding that Facebook take action against ongoing “freebooting” of videos, conflicts over copyright continue to fester.
Given that Silicon Valley’s best and brightest seem adept at developing new ways of sharing (and appropriating) content to generate billions in profit, one has to ask–why not apply some of that technical wizardry to better tackle digital content theft?
There have been some examples of technology being used to effectively thwart theft– YouTube’s Content ID System being perhaps the most obvious example. While certainly far from perfect (that’s a whole other story) YouTube’s CMS system does provide rights holders with a technological tool to safeguard their video and/or audio on YouTube.
Read MoreToday the Department of Commerce Internet Policy Task Force (which includes the USPTO) released its long anticipated white paper on “Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages–Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy.” Among its findings is support for a copyright small claims process to adjudicate infringement claims. The Copyright Alliance issued a press release summarizing the report:
Read MoreAn interview worth listening to: Ruth Vitale, CEO of Creative Future, talked about technology and...
Read MoreAccording to a story in today’s NY Times, the folks at YouTube are ready to pony up cash to support some of its users “fair use” claims in court.
“YouTube said on Thursday that it would pick up the legal costs of a handful of video creators that the company thinks are the targets of unfair takedown demands. It said the creators it chose legally use third-party content under “fair use” provisions carved out for commentary, criticism, news and parody.”
You’ve probably read a lot about “fair use” lately. It’s the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s mantra and if the folks there had their way, pretty much everything and anything would be considered “fair use.” Fair use an important legal doctrine and when applied properly (criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research) is not an infringement of copyright. However, these days, too often is used as a disingenuous defense for copyright theft.
When a court recently ruled that a snippet of a Prince song was indeed “fair use” in the notorious Dancing Baby case it gave a boost to efforts to use fair use as a cudgel against rights holders who legitimately assert their rights using the DMCA takedown process.
Note that the actual video at the center of this case was reposted after the uploader sent a counter-notice. The only reason the case ended up in court was because the uploader, Stephanie Lenz, filed suit and the only reason she did so was because she was bankrolled by the EFF. The EFF saw it as an opportunity to advance its Google-funded agenda.
Read MoreThis past week members of the House Judiciary Committee traveled to California to hold a pair of roundtable discussions on the future of copyright. On Tuesday committee members were in Santa Clara, the heart of Silicon Valley, and on Wednesday traveled to Los Angeles to hear from a variety of stakeholders discussing everything from overhauling an out-dated U.S. Copyright Office to DMCA circumvention for tractor repairs.
Though I wasn’t at the LA event, I read with great interest a report in Variety by Ted Johnson that documented an exchange between Google’s legal director for copyright, Fred von Lohmann and Richard Gladstein, founder of Film Colony…von Lohmann’s posturing on Google’s piracy problem is nothing new, but it is worth pointing out how his statements are carefully crafted to dovetail with Google’s own (vague) propagandistic promises.