Originally Posted by kane

That is what I am getting at. How do we define a "bogus" claim? Obviously if a site is not infringing and a company knows they are not infringing but files a claim anyway in an attempt to bully or blackmail them, that is a bogus claim. But if a company feels that a site is in violation, they have evidence to back that belief up, yet they still lose in court is that a bogus claim or is that just a lost court case?

If any lost court case is considered a bogus claim then I would never support an amendment like this because it puts the risk of suing so high that no company would dare try it. You never know for sure how things will go in court and if the penalty for trying to defend your copyright and and losing a legit case is the lost of all your copyrights nobody will try defend themselves.