I don't think Youtube has the legal right to block companies from using the DMCA system like you seem to think the do? Like yeah maybe punish them but how? The only thing they care about is their Copyright, which youtube must help them protect under DMCA.
-
-
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
As I stated, the punishment should be the same. False copyright claims and DMCA takedowns should be punished with the exact same punishment that is given to the people being falsely targeted. The law itself does not allow for false copyright claims nor dmca takedowns, but the law
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jakiraokami @Bucket_Of_Crabs and
does not force youtube to punish people for doing it. The law does however force youtube to punish content creators even if they are falsely accused. The law does however not -stop- youtube from punishing people that are doing false copyright claims and false DMCA takedowns, that
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jakiraokami @Bucket_Of_Crabs and
is a choice youtube themselves choose to make. So YouTube is making the concious decision not to punish these people. Also, false copyright claims and dmca takedowns are not only done by companies. For instance, Alex Mauer https://youtu.be/dUEECgeBMg0 https://youtu.be/jrKYXiPxR5k
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jakiraokami @Bucket_Of_Crabs and
Or how about Jim Sterling vs Digital Homicide:https://youtu.be/qS-LXvhy1Do
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jakiraokami @jess689_ and
Yes but the only punishment youtube could try to pursue is a lawsuit over these so called "false dmca" cases, but I don't know what law they broke or how they caused youtube any damages?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
Filing a false Copyright claim or DMCA Takedown is illegal as far as I know. That is the law that they are breaking. The punishment is up to YouTube to decide, currently, they have chosen to have zero punishment.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jakiraokami @jess689_ and
I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp … But it might be hard to prove that UMG didnt "consider—in good faith and prior to sending a takedown notification—whether allegedly infringing material constitutes fair use" Which is what the case sets precedent for.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
that's correct. It's technically on the company / person filing it to know if they are doing it in good faith or not. But you should also see that this doesn't stop youtube for punishing them after they have been found to have done it not in good faith.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jakiraokami @jess689_ and
I don't get what punishment you are refering to, the only thing that can happen is them getting sued due to missuse of dmca. They literally can't stop companies like UMG to continue to use the DMCA system source:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 … [(i)(2)(B) specifically]
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Any punishment at all. This law does -not- stop YouTube from punishing people that are filing false DMCA / Copyright. There is no law that stops YouTube from punishing them. They can't pre-empetively punish them, obviously, but after they have been found to have done it, YouTube
-
-
Replying to @jakiraokami @Bucket_Of_Crabs and
makes the concious decision not to do -any- punishment whatsoever to the people or companies doing false copyright claims / strikes or DMCA takedowns. I'm not sure why I keep having to repeat this to you? The whole point is that YouTube -currently- does -not- give -any-
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes - 8 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.