Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

snot

(10,520 posts)
Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:21 AM Jan 2013

Corpulent Copyrights and the Abuse of the DMCA Takedown System

From http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/buffy-vs-edward-remix-unfairly-removed-by-lionsgate/ :

"It appeared as though Lionsgate just filed two separate infringement claims on the same piece of media.

 Confused and slightly frustrated I once again embarked on repeating the same dispute process as before. I filed my fair use dispute via YouTube’s built-in form exactly as I had the first time around.

"Again, just like the first time, it was rejected by Lionsgate within 24 hours and they reinstated their claim on the remix. So I filed my second long-form appeal using YouTube’s system, again making the detailed legal arguments crafted by my lawyer at New Media Rights which lay out very clearly all the fair use arguments. And I waited for a response.

"On December 18th, I received notification from YouTube that Lionsgate had again ignored my fair use arguments, rejected my appeal and this time had the remix deleted from YouTube entirely.

"I was dumbfounded. And to add insult to injury I was now locked out of my YouTube account and had a copyright infringement “strike” placed on my channel."

Much more at the link.

(A side note: Did you realize, if I understand correctly, that there's effectively no longer any expiration date on copyrights on audio recordings?)

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

msongs

(67,394 posts)
1. you could create your own original content instead of using somebody else's? there's a thought nt
Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:38 AM
Jan 2013

snot

(10,520 posts)
3. Copyright restrictions have expanded exponentially, becoming a bloated monster
Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:14 PM
Jan 2013

stifling creativity instead of rewarding it. The fair use and other exceptions to copyright law that remain are there for reasons of both fairness and indisputable benefits to society.

In this situation, the artist's work was in compliance with even this bloated law, yet big media abused the take-down system to wrongfully cause her/him to have to waste gobs of time, energy, and money to protect her/his rights.

Are you aware that there is now NO expiration date on copyrights on recordings? This doesn't protect creatives; it protects big media.

Originality is always a matter of degree. Shakespeare stole the plot of every play he wrote.

Downwinder

(12,869 posts)
2. The best defense is a good offense.
Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:31 PM
Jan 2013

There is a lot to be said for being the first on the Courthouse steps.

snot

(10,520 posts)
4. Every artist who makes a work COMPLYING w/ the law but suspects some media co. MIGHT
Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:20 PM
Jan 2013

abuse the take-down system to wrongfully object should spend $5,000 to pre-emptively sue them?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Corpulent Copyrights and ...