View Single Post
Old 07-01-2012, 06:57 PM  
potter
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Denver
Posts: 6,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin View Post
Speaking of misinformation, your post actually isn't accurate, either.

There is more to complying with the DMCA than simply responding to take-down notices and the tube owner/operator not being the one who uploads the content in the first place.

I still see many tubes that have not registered a DMCA agent with the U.S. Copyright office. That's a violation of DMCA. (For those who care about chapter and verse in citations, it's a violation of §512 (c)(2), specifically.)

Under §512 (i)(1)(A), UGC sites like tubes also must establish and enforce a policy with respect to repeat infringers among the users who upload content; many tubes still have not done this.

Also under Under §512 (i), UGC sites must also "accommodate and not interfere with standard technical measures." This is something many tubes do not do.

There are other requirements for receiving safe harbor, as well, but my point is that it seems like you might need to be on the receiving end of a few "the more you know" moments yourself. ;-)

Oh, one more thing: that YouTube case you alluded to? It isn't over, and the most recent ruling (by the Second Circuit) cut in favor of Viacom, not YouTube.
I wasn't arguing what is needed to be compliant, but that someone's content being on a tube site doesn't make the tube site illegal. You're arguing from the other direction I did.

Yes, there are various items that a site owner must comply with to meet safe harbor.

And the reason Google lost that latest court date is because they didn't meet/comply with every little detail. So the basis of the point I made still stands.
__________________

potter is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote