3 Responses

1. Jonathan Bailey

   July 5th, 2007 at 10:17 am

   1

   Though I agree that Web Sheriff did something stupid and illegal, it’s unfair to punish the DMCA notice and takedown provisions for their ignorance. The DMCA provides penalties for people that abuse the procedure and, theoretically, Web Sheriff could be sued for their actions if it is found that they sought to chill speech.

   The DMCA, though definitely not perfect and in need of revisions, does provide some important services. It protects small Webmasters and copyright holders, letting them stop infringement of their material when they otherwise would not be able to sue. It is a powerful tool in fighting spam blogs as well as RSS scrapers.

   It also protects Web hosts by exempting them from copyright liability and, in the event of a copyright dispute, offers a way for the subject of a notice to get the work putback pending a lawsuit.

   For every fraudulent DMCA notice sent, there are hundreds, if not thousands, that are just and deserved. In general, in my experience, the law is used for good and most problems are related mistakes made when trying to follow the law’s rather complicated guidelines.

   There is a need for revisions, especially for stronger punishments in cases where free speech is chilled, but the concept is good and not radically different from the way things were before the DMCA where a copyright holder would write the abuse team and ask for removal of infringing work.

   Sorry for the rant, but I wanted to answer your question to the best of my ability.

2. Jim Kukral

   July 5th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

   2

   Much appreciated Jonathan. Your explanation helped me understand them better, thanks.

3. Jonathan Bailey

   July 6th, 2007 at 8:24 am

   3

   No problem, glad it helped! Just send me an email if there is anything I can do for you!