DMCA Law question

[Mutt]

these file host fuckers are getting worse and worse. they now think that even with the DMCA they can make up their own law - writing their own DMCA procedures that if you don't follow they feel they can ignore since you didn't follow their own made up rules. Please tell me this has to be bullshit legally. If I send out a DMCA takedown request where I swear I am the owner of the content, include the offending URL's then I have fullfilled my obligation no? Or is that fucking piece of shit law so badly constructed that it does give the 'service provider' the right to concoct their own rules that I have to follow?

worst. law. ever.

[CurrentlySober]

Bump 4 you

[Nautilus]

That's bullshit and by adding roadblocks to DMCA process they're effectively loosing their safe harbor protection. You can sue them and win.

Btw, what filehosts are like that?

[Jack Sparrow]

They can ask for proof.

[Nautilus]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

They can ask for proof.

No they can't. They should either remove or provide counter-DMCA filed by their client. The whole safe harbor thing is about an ISP being a non-party in all copyright disputes.

[TeenCat]

hey man its xmas time ...

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

That's bullshit and by adding roadblocks to DMCA process they're effectively loosing their safe harbor protection. You can sue them and win.

Btw, what filehosts are like that?

http://www.oron.com and from what I read they own http://www.forumophilia.com - which if it can be proven totally exposes them as more than a 'service provider' with no safe harbor protection.

i have been sending this host the same DMCA takedown request email written by a top attorney that I send to Hotfile, Rapidshare etc and they do delete the files at least - Oron.com ignores them, their hosting company Leaseweb is Dutch and notorious for not giving a fuck about copyright infringement complaints. GlobalCrossing the upstream provider does nothing. I've sent abuse complaints to Paypal who also make you jump through hoops just to file a copyright infringement complaint.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by TeenCat

hey man its xmas time ...

merry xmas teencat - nice to see the fag reindeer back

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

No they can't. They should either remove or provide counter-DMCA filed by their client. The whole safe harbor thing is about an ISP being a non-party in all copyright disputes.

Yes they can.
Especially in holland. Leaseweb rocks if you dont want to follow the rules (american ones).

[Jack Sparrow]

Btw you guys should checkout fritchy, hint hint.

[Nautilus]

Originally Posted by Mutt

http://www.oron.com and from what I read they own http://www.forumophilia.com - which if it can be proven totally exposes them as more than a 'service provider' with no safe harbor protection.

i have been sending this host the same DMCA takedown request email written by a top attorney that I send to Hotfile, Rapidshare etc and they do delete the files at least - Oron.com ignores them, their hosting company Leaseweb is Dutch and notorious for not giving a fuck about copyright infringement complaints. GlobalCrossing the upstream provider does nothing. I've sent abuse complaints to Paypal who also make you jump through hoops just to file a copyright infringement complaint.

Oron has been pain in the ass to deal with awhile back. But recently they do remove everything we send them no questions asked. I remember a couple of months ago they asked for some kind of verification which we did, and that was it. No other problems.

Probably they like your content more and do not want it removed from their servers

But anyway, unanswered DMCA is a strong card, you can play it nicely. They're not durt poor studs you can stumble upon easily when sueing torrent users. They do have money, and they do have US presence (through paypal at the very least). Nice chunk of cash on the table for you. Just make sure to register your works with the US copyright office (if not done already), after that you can get statutory damages awarded to you by US courts (HUGE ones), and then go on to collect (freeze their paypal if necessary, or any other of their US assets if they have any). I single unanswered DMCA with a mere hundred links in it can get you MILLIONS.

[Nautilus]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Yes they can.
Especially in holland.

Tell that to mininova lol.

Leaseweb is playing with fire. Holland is not a place to mess with the copyright laws.

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Yes they can.

No, they can't. Just because they do doesn't mean they're allowed to within the DMCA law (which anyone can read if they cared to).

I've had this same problem with Oron. It'll only get better if LOTS of us lean on them and their payment providers. Eventually they'll get their ass handed to them.

[nicedreams]

We just sent a DMCA notice to Oron last week and they took our videos down quickly.

Jimmy

[Shap]

Originally Posted by Mutt

http://www.oron.com and from what I read they own http://www.forumophilia.com - which if it can be proven totally exposes them as more than a 'service provider' with no safe harbor protection.

i have been sending this host the same DMCA takedown request email written by a top attorney that I send to Hotfile, Rapidshare etc and they do delete the files at least - Oron.com ignores them, their hosting company Leaseweb is Dutch and notorious for not giving a fuck about copyright infringement complaints. GlobalCrossing the upstream provider does nothing. I've sent abuse complaints to Paypal who also make you jump through hoops just to file a copyright infringement complaint.

Have you hit up their registrar?

[Barefootsies]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

That's bullshit and by adding roadblocks to DMCA process they're effectively loosing their safe harbor protection. You can sue them and win.

Originally Posted by Nautilus

No they can't. They should either remove or provide counter-DMCA filed by their client. The whole safe harbor thing is about an ISP being a non-party in all copyright disputes.

That would be correct.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by nicedreams

We just sent a DMCA notice to Oron last week and they took our videos down quickly.

Jimmy

can you send me your DMCA notice you sent them so I can see how it differs from mine if it does?

mutt AT rogers.com

thanks

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

Just make sure to register your works with the US copyright office (if not done already), after that you can get statutory damages awarded to you by US courts (HUGE ones), and then go on to collect (freeze their paypal if necessary, or any other of their US assets if they have any). I single unanswered DMCA with a mere hundred links in it can get you MILLIONS.

yes this is the key to it

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by Shap

Have you hit up their registrar?

no, that's the only one i haven't - good idea.

they think they can make up their own rules - they want a scanned letter with letterhead - an electronic signature - it enfuriates me that these theives who are stealing from me have the balls to make me dance like a monkey just to stop them from stealing.

I came across a new filehost today with an affiliate program setup that will blow your mind.

Hotfile and Rapidshare as much as I hate them run their businesses in tight accordance with the DMCA. Files come down fast with a simple DMCA notice via email Now you have all these new ones popping up who have no attorneys or understanding of the DMCA and think anything goes.

And of course shady porn webmasters are now getting into this game - checked out the portfolio of an adult web designer I wanted to use and what did I see - new designs for file hosting companies.

[Agent 488]

Originally Posted by Mutt

g.

I came across a new filehost today with an affiliate program setup that will blow your mind.

what would be the difference between the ones with affiliate programs already like sharing matrix, hotfile, oron etc?

[Spudstr]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

No they can't. They should either remove or provide counter-DMCA filed by their client. The whole safe harbor thing is about an ISP being a non-party in all copyright disputes.

Under DMCA hosts most certainly can ask you for proof that you are the copy right holder, or proof toa profile/content location on your existing site.

For example we got a blanket DMCA for a certain cam site stating images on x y z URLs were theres. Simple we asked to see that profile and to provide that cam models profile so we can validate that it is in deed there content they hold rights to. If not they are slinging mud with out jurisdiction or proof. Their request is simply to broad to be handled.

If you read the actual laws for DMCA you have to provide proof you do in fact hold the copyright. If not someone can simply go and send millions of dmca requests to everyone in the world demanding things to be removed.

Considering this is what we were told by our Attorney Marc Randazza who is as many of you know the exact type of lawyer who goes after people for DMCA.

[Spudstr]

Originally Posted by Mutt

no, that's the only one i haven't - good idea.

they think they can make up their own rules - they want a scanned letter with letterhead - an electronic signature - it enfuriates me that these theives who are stealing from me have the balls to make me dance like a monkey just to stop them from stealing.

I came across a new filehost today with an affiliate program setup that will blow your mind.

Hotfile and Rapidshare as much as I hate them run their businesses in tight accordance with the DMCA. Files come down fast with a simple DMCA notice via email Now you have all these new ones popping up who have no attorneys or understanding of the DMCA and think anything goes.

And of course shady porn webmasters are now getting into this game - checked out the portfolio of an adult web designer I wanted to use and what did I see - new designs for file hosting companies.

Technically they have every right to ask you for proof, and to be honest the only certain way you are serving someone with a DMCA complaint is with a certified letter. Paper trails > email trails.

And to be honest http://www.copyright.gov/l You need to send the DMCA complaint to a registered copyright agent for that host/organization. If they are not listed and having a registered agent then well. They can be in some trouble.


EDIT: http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/index.html is the proper url

[Spudstr]

Originally Posted by Nautilus

Tell that to mininova lol.

Leaseweb is playing with fire. Holland is not a place to mess with the copyright laws.

Leaseweb is coming to the states with a new datacentear in northern virginia. They will have to register with the US Copyright office as well and have to pretty much abide by all US DMCA complaints and not give people the finger because they are not a US based organization.

[rogueteens]

Originally Posted by Spudstr

If not someone can simply go and send millions of dmca requests to everyone in the world demanding things to be removed.

Sounds like fun, we should do a 12Chan on one of those big illegal tubes and hit them with millions of DCMA requests in a day! :D

[Spudstr]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

Sounds like fun, we should do a 12Chan on one of those big illegal tubes and hit them with millions of DCMA requests in a day! :D

DMCA does say it is illegal to do that you know. Two wrongs make a right?

[Nautilus]

Originally Posted by Spudstr

Under DMCA hosts most certainly can ask you for proof that you are the copy right holder, or proof toa profile/content location on your existing site.

If it is so "certain" it will be easy for you to qoute the exact provision in DMCA law that authorizes ISPs to ask for proof.

For example we got a blanket DMCA for a certain cam site stating images on x y z URLs were theres. Simple we asked to see that profile and to provide that cam models profile so we can validate that it is in deed there content they hold rights to. If not they are slinging mud with out jurisdiction or proof. Their request is simply to broad to be handled.

You only got away with it because they sent you fake bs takedown request. But if, by chance, all of those pics were indeed their, and they'd sue because you bitch and wouldn't remove in a timely manner as the law says you should, you'd be spamming Buy&Sell forum now selling your servers to pay for damages awarded to this copyright holder by court.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by Mutt

http://www.oron.com and from what I read they own http://www.forumophilia.com - which if it can be proven totally exposes them as more than a 'service provider' with no safe harbor protection.

i have been sending this host the same DMCA takedown request email written by a top attorney that I send to Hotfile, Rapidshare etc and they do delete the files at least - Oron.com ignores them, their hosting company Leaseweb is Dutch and notorious for not giving a fuck about copyright infringement complaints. GlobalCrossing the upstream provider does nothing. I've sent abuse complaints to Paypal who also make you jump through hoops just to file a copyright infringement complaint.

my god how many times do you have to be told that DMCA is an american law

if anything the lawsuit that fucked over mininova proves if you obey DMCA takedown request but ignore your own countries equivalent you get no safe harbor protection at all.

get a lawyer from the country to draft a takedown notice that is complient with that countries laws.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by VGeorgie

No, they can't. Just because they do doesn't mean they're allowed to within the DMCA law (which anyone can read if they cared to).

I've had this same problem with Oron. It'll only get better if LOTS of us lean on them and their payment providers. Eventually they'll get their ass handed to them.

Then dont believe, im 100% sure they can. But if ya'll wanna hang on to the dmca from your side its fine with me.

Originally Posted by Nautilus

If it is so "certain" it will be easy for you to qoute the exact provision in DMCA law that authorizes ISPs to ask for proof.



You only got away with it because they sent you fake bs takedown request. But if, by chance, all of those pics were indeed their, and they'd sue because you bitch and wouldn't remove in a timely manner as the law says you should, you'd be spamming Buy&Sell forum now selling your servers to pay for damages awarded to this copyright holder by court.

Wow, you mad?

Not a very nice way to treat someone thats respected throughout the community son. I get that you are all upset, but i know for a fact he is right. And not only that, i know for another fact that spud here is very serious about dmca's and takedown request.

You are barking up the wrong tree. Nice to see who not to promote from now on however.

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by Spudstr

If you read the actual laws for DMCA you have to provide proof you do in fact hold the copyright.

You're misinformed. The law says no such thing (feel free to quote from the law if you insist otherwise). You must claim, under penalty of perjury, that your statement is true and accurate, but it says nothing about "proving" you hold the copyright, because such proof is subjective and inconclusive.

In addition, the DMCA *does* say that if the takedown notice substantially complies with the requirements the offending party must take action. Oron and some of the others are ignoring or rejecting valid DMCA based on one or two inconsequential issues missing, like providing a valid email and physical address, but not phone number. The law merely states you must provide sufficient information for them to contact you, if that's required.

The DMCA requires that to be covered by safe harbor the ISP or service must have on file with the Copyright Office the name and full contact information of the service's designated agent. Most of these services don't comply at all with this or provide bogus information (wanting to remain anonymous), and that in itself makes them ineligible for safe harbor ("The limitations on liability established in this subsection apply to a service provider only if the service provider has designated an agent...)."

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Then dont believe, im 100% sure they can. But if ya'll wanna hang on to the dmca from your side its fine with me.

It's not like the text of the law is a secret. It's only on about 10,000 sites. Find a copy and show me where it says they can demand proof of copyright ownership.

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

get a lawyer from the country to draft a takedown notice that is complient with that countries laws.

More talking out of your ass.

Oron is registered by a US entity and uses private registration, making it difficult - at best - to know what country they are located in. Their site makes no mention of it otherwise.

They do, however, provide a link for DMCA (explicitly identified as such) with instructions to provide them a DMCA notice, complete with reference to the relevant US statute. Presumably they provide this page with the intention of following this silly American law.

Is there anything else you want to say without taking even the slightest degree of research?

[nicedreams]

Originally Posted by Mutt

can you send me your DMCA notice you sent them so I can see how it differs from mine if it does?

mutt AT rogers.com

thanks

Sent.

Jimmy

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by Spudstr

Technically they have every right to ask you for proof, and to be honest the only certain way you are serving someone with a DMCA complaint is with a certified letter. Paper trails > email trails.

And to be honest http://www.copyright.gov/l You need to send the DMCA complaint to a registered copyright agent for that host/organization. If they are not listed and having a registered agent then well. They can be in some trouble.


EDIT: http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/index.html is the proper url

LOL - and you're with/own a hosting company. Yes a hosting company that hosts several large tube sites of the thieving variety.

NOWHERE in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act does it say anything about having to prove to a service provider that you own the content. NOWHERE.
So yes anybody can send out thousands of fraudulent DMCA takedown notices and the law protects service providers against that - a counter claim against the complainant which has its own penalties under the law.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by nicedreams

Sent.

Jimmy

thanks

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

my god how many times do you have to be told that DMCA is an american law

if anything the lawsuit that fucked over mininova proves if you obey DMCA takedown request but ignore your own countries equivalent you get no safe harbor protection at all.

get a lawyer from the country to draft a takedown notice that is complient with that countries laws.

I'm aware that Leaseweb isn't American, it's why Oron is hosted there. Oron is American, Santa Clara California.

[Brad Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Mutt

these file host fuckers are getting worse and worse. they now think that even with the DMCA they can make up their own law - writing their own DMCA procedures that if you don't follow they feel they can ignore since you didn't follow their own made up rules. Please tell me this has to be bullshit legally. If I send out a DMCA takedown request where I swear I am the owner of the content, include the offending URL's then I have fullfilled my obligation no? Or is that fucking piece of shit law so badly constructed that it does give the 'service provider' the right to concoct their own rules that I have to follow?

worst. law. ever.

While there is certainly room for improvement in the DMCA, it does work and have some teeth. The problem is largely that on both sides of the fence, too many people don't understand it. On the complaining side of DMCA, most would benefit from a well written template and explanation on how to properly search and send one out - including to WHOM (the registered copyright agent, if one exists or if you can actually figure out the proper company name).

Most hosts don't fully understand the law (or comply) and therefore don't qualify for the safe harbor.. they aren't educated enough to know what it is they don't know. If a DMCA complaint is properly formatted and sent to the registered copyright agent at a web site in question, or in absence of that, for the host of the web site in question.. then the content must come down.

From the moment that the web site submits a counter affidavit stating that they do in fact have the right to publish the material in question then the clock starts ticking again. This does not give the web site the immediate ability to keep it's material online - in fact, the material must stay down for 10 days. This is to allow for the complaining party to go and file an injunction, etc, if necessary.

The teeth in the DMCA starts with the liability of the complaining party. If one is going to send a take down notice, they sure better have the right to do so. Swearing under penalty of perjury isn't a "little" deal.

Perhaps one of the lawyers can jump in and provide a more thorough explanation for the benefit of all of the readers here. Above is just my overview... The process here at MojoHost is managed by our legal counselor, Corey Silverstein.

Cheers,

Brad

[DWB]

Originally Posted by Spudstr

Two wrongs make a right?

In this case, yes.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Mutt

LOL - and you're with/own a hosting company. Yes a hosting company that hosts several large tube sites of the thieving variety.

NOWHERE in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act does it say anything about having to prove to a service provider that you own the content. NOWHERE.
So yes anybody can send out thousands of fraudulent DMCA takedown notices and the law protects service providers against that - a counter claim against the complainant which has its own penalties under the law.

Please provide proof of yf hosting illegal thieving tubes.
I'll be sending this to eric in a bit.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by VGeorgie

It's not like the text of the law is a secret. It's only on about 10,000 sites. Find a copy and show me where it says they can demand proof of copyright ownership.

Info comes straight from a lawyer thats very wellknown to adult and dmca. If you take those "texts of law" on 10000s of websites serious i feel sorry for you.

[d-null]

can someone explain further this concept of a "copyright agent"? can you designate yourself as your own copyright agent, reachable only through email? I think I've seen it done that way before

[DWB]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Please provide proof of yf hosting illegal thieving tubes.

I'll be sending this to eric in a bit.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

posted twice it gets old

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Info comes straight from a lawyer thats very wellknown to adult and dmca. If you take those "texts of law" on 10000s of websites serious i feel sorry for you.

Oh, that was easy, Just claim "some lawyer" told you otherwise. Look, the section on host liability is all of a couple of paragraphs. I'll help you: look in section 512(c). Find *anything* about the host having the right to determine the legitimacy of the copyright claim beyond accepting the sworn statement of the complaining party.

You WON'T, because they CAN'T.

Find the section in the law or otherwise you're just one more person making a false claim he can't back up. If I've misinterpreted the law, cite the exact paragraph. Or have your lawyer come here and do it for you.

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by d-null

can someone explain further this concept of a "copyright agent"? can you designate yourself as your own copyright agent, reachable only through email? I think I've seen it done that way before

You can provide the email address for DMCA notices, but the Copyright Office wants more, and this information is not subject to privacy laws.

(A) the name, address, phone number, and electronic mail address of the agent.

(B) other contact information which the Register of Copyrights may deem appropriate.

The operative word in sub-para A is "and." See Section 512(C)(2). Most of these hosts don't have a registered agent, making them ineligible for safe harbor anyway. Not that it matters, as hosts like Oron don't qualify anyway because of 512(C)(1)(b): they directly benefit financially from the infringing activity, and by paying a bounty to the uploader encourage the infringing activity.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by VGeorgie

Oh, that was easy, Just claim "some lawyer" told you otherwise. Look, the section on host liability is all of a couple of paragraphs. I'll help you: look in section 512(c). Find *anything* about the host having the right to determine the legitimacy of the copyright claim beyond accepting the sworn statement of the complaining party.

You WON'T, because they CAN'T.

Find the section in the law or otherwise you're just one more person making a false claim he can't back up. If I've misinterpreted the law, cite the exact paragraph. Or have your lawyer come here and do it for you.

You think i care enough about you to do that?

Really?

[d-null]

Originally Posted by VGeorgie

You can provide the email address for DMCA notices, but the Copyright Office wants more, and this information is not subject to privacy laws.

(A) the name, address, phone number, and electronic mail address of the agent.

(B) other contact information which the Register of Copyrights may deem appropriate.

The operative word in sub-para A is "and." See Section 512(C)(2). Most of these hosts don't have a registered agent, making them ineligible for safe harbor anyway. Not that it matters, as hosts like Oron don't qualify anyway because of 512(C)(1)(b): they directly benefit financially from the infringing activity, and by paying a bounty to the uploader encourage the infringing activity.

when you use the term "hosts", are you referring legally to the actual server location, or are you referring to an entity hosting, ie. any website?

[Agent 488]

http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/...wn-dmca-agent/

http://www.freelancewritinggigs.com/...for-your-site/

[DWB]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

posted twice it gets old

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

You think i care enough about you to do that?

Really?

Proving you're not just talking out of your ass isn't for me, pal, it's for you.

[VGeorgie]

Originally Posted by d-null

when you use the term "hosts", are you referring legally to the actual server location, or are you referring to an entity hosting, ie. any website?

A "host" is anyone that literally delivers content, or is involved in the delivery of the content. It can be a website, ISP, hosting company, and many other entities.

The DMCA was written to provide an exclusion for Internet service providers, but websites have adopted the safe harbor provisions as also covering them. This works as long as the site derives no direct financial gain from the infringement. So, Google is covered because they don't charge. Oron and their ilk are not.