"We'd like to inform you that we've received another complaint regarding your blog," begins the cheerful letter "Upon review of your account, we've noted that your blog has repeatedly violated Blogger's Terms of Service ... [and] we've been forced to remove your blog. Thank you for your understanding."
To file a notice of infringement with us, you must provide a written communication (by fax or regular mail -- not by email, except by prior agreement) that sets forth the items specified below. Please note that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys' fees) if you materially misrepresent that a product or activity is infringing your copyrights. Indeed, in a recent case (please see http://www.onlinepolicy.org/action/legpolicy/opg_v_diebold/ for more information), a company that sent an infringement notification seeking removal of online materials that were protected by the fair use doctrine was ordered to pay such costs and attorneys fees. The company agreed to pay over $100,000. Accordingly, if you are not sure whether material available online infringes your copyright, we suggest that you first contact an attorney.
Alvy Ampersand: ...if you don't want to be beholden to the draconian rules BigCorp (Boo! Hiss!) don't use their resource.
Last summer, we updated our enforcement of the DMCA. Our current policy is that when we receive a DMCA complaint, we:
* Notify the blogger about the complaint by e-mail and on the Blogger dashboard.
* Reset the offending post to 'draft' status, allowing the blogger to remove the offending content.
* Send a copy of the complaint to ChillingEffects.org.
When we receive multiple DMCA complaints about the same blog, and have no indication that the offending content is being used in an authorized manner, we will remove the blog.
Mister_A: How about MusicBlogocalypse? MusicBlogamageddon?
When the copyright expires, the work enters the public domain. It is estimated that currently, of all the books found in the world's libraries, only about 15% are in the public domain, even though only 10% of all books are still in print; the remaining 75% are books which remain unavailable because they are still under copyright protection. [from Wikipedia]
naju: Should we let the bloggers make this judgment [of the potential market of the copyrighted material], or the copyright owners?
naju: Are you really arguing that anything that's not currently in print should be in the public domain?
squeakyfromme: So, again, take what you can grab and be happy to have it, but isn't pretending the rightful owners of that material have no legitimate recourse to try and stop you a little facetious?
« Older An igloo has been built near Capitol Hill. Someon... | Todd Alcott has written in-dep... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt