|
| |
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2843
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Nambucca / Kempsey, Australia
Status: offline
 |
Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 0:03:04
Regarding the Copyright Article posted on the Hints & Tips forum.....
quote:
In most cases you will receive responses from webhosts or registration services that require you to provide additional details so that the infringement can be investigated. It may seem obvious to the copyright holder, but the web hosts typically have a contractual agreement with their clients and are legally obligated to research any infringements before removing hosting or registration services.
It seems strange to me that if the author believes their work has been reproduced that they provide proof to the web host who then would become the referee in deciding whether or not that work has been reproduced, before pulling the site down. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of a Copyright governing body to determine whether a breach of copyright has ocurred and for them to instruct the web host to pull the site down?
Nicole
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
dpf
Posts: 7123
Joined: 11/12/2003
From: India-napolis
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 8:07:32
quote:
Shouldn't it be the responsibility of a Copyright governing body to determine whether a breach of copyright has ocurred and for them to instruct the web host to pull the site down? In the US, you have a "governing body" charged with issuing copyrights but none charged or authorized to enforce - that is left to the courts which requires the offended party to initiate investigation and court action.
_____________________________
Dan
| |
|
|
|
caz
Posts: 3547
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 8:33:47
The step quoted by Nicole would be the first thing to do before resorting to legal procedures (and bills). If you can prove prior ownership of the copyright by the means of the Internet Archive (Wayback Machine) I woud think that that would be pretty conclusive.
_____________________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will dance, or more on your keyboard.
Cheshire cat. www.doracat.co.uk
I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.
| |
|
|
|
notepage
Posts: 33
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 9:17:18
In the US innocence is assumed, unless conclusive proof of copyright violation is provided. Having recently gone through this, I don't blame the hosts for requiring conclusive proof - whether its from archive.org or something else. It would create a liability for the web host to remove content just because someone "told" them it was violating a copyright.
In the US copyright holders are required to "defend" their copyright and trademarks in order to maintain them, as someone mentioned there is not a governing body that "enforces" them.
| |
|
|
|
Mojo
Posts: 2431
From: Chicago
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 10:25:50
I responded to the original post, but I will mention it here again - Counter Notice. I have also gone through this many times, both on the sending and receiving end.
If a Counter Notice is filed by whoever was accused of a copyright violation the service provider mustrelist the material. If they don't relist the material when a proper Counter Notice is filed they can be held liable. Often, in competitive markets claiming copyright violations is an easy method to temporarily knock someone out of the search results. The service providers, in order to protect themselves, should simply follow the law (U.S.) - which requires them to remove copyright infringments when notified and to also *relist* them when properly notified (Counter Notice).
quote:
If you can prove prior ownership of the copyright by the means of the Internet Archive (Wayback Machine) I woud think that that would be pretty conclusive.
No. Conclusive would be a registered copyright. The internet has very little of the worlds copyrighted material. Wayback has even less.
_____________________________
Split Testing
Chicago Order Fulfillment
Emergency Kits
| |
|
|
|
caz
Posts: 3547
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 11:37:28
quote:
Often, in competitive markets claiming copyright violations is an easy method to temporarily knock someone out of the search results.
Is this a frequent occurrence, then? I suppose that I am not in the highly competitive world of internet business, just concerned with artistic and literary copyright effects and that never occured to me. It seems to border on shady practice, if not downright criminal and certainly requires the strong arm of the law.
_____________________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will dance, or more on your keyboard.
Cheshire cat. www.doracat.co.uk
I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.
| |
|
|
|
Mojo
Posts: 2431
From: Chicago
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 13:20:16
quote:
It seems to border on shady practice, if not downright criminal and certainly requires the strong arm of the law.
Absolutely.
It is very difficult to police copyright fraud. Each country has different laws - some countries have almost zero laws and the teeth on copyright laws are not very sharp anyhow.
You're in the UK, right? Let's say someone (in the U.S.) send a copyright complaint against your site to Google. Anyone can file a DMCA. So, I zip one off and without any investigation, they will remove your site from the SERPs (search results). This is the law (U.S.). If Google wants to avoid any culpability they need to follow the DMCA which says that if a proper complaint is filed they can avoid any liability if they (or any service provider) remove the copyrighted work (the copyright holder is identified as the person filing the complaint). Of course, there a big fines etc associated with fraudulent activity.
Your defense if someone does this is to file a Counter Notice. This basically tells Google (or any service provider) that you are claiming to be the legitimate copyright holder. Google then will reinstate your site - again, according to the DMCA - they have to relist the site once a Counter Notice is properly submitted.
This entire process will knock you out of Google, Yahoo, eBay for 30 days or so. Maybe longer.
Now, let's say you wanted to sue the shite out of whoever filed the DMCA on you... so you hire a U.S. attorney and try to go after the person who filed the claim. But, wait! You quickly find out the Hotmail account they were using was set up from an internet cafe in Chicago. Paid in cash. The phone number used was a pay-by-the-minute type that was purchased in a Walmart with cash.
Does this sound far fetched to you? It's not. It has happened to me more than once and has happened to others that I have spoken with.
It gets very frustrating when DMCAs are filed in succession. BOOM - you're out. Wait, wait, wait - you're back in. BOOM - you're out again. Repeat.
How would you defend this?
_____________________________
Split Testing
Chicago Order Fulfillment
Emergency Kits
| |
|
|
|
Reflect
Posts: 4769
From: USA
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 14:47:50
quote:
How would you defend this?
Naive question, wouldn't Google (Let's pick on Google) see the trend and stop game? Couldn't you as the counter filer point out to Google that it has gone back and forth X amounts of time and is now a court issue?
Mind numbing.
Take care,
Brian
_____________________________
| |
|
|
|
Mojo
Posts: 2431
From: Chicago
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 16:34:19
quote:
Naive question, wouldn't Google (Let's pick on Google) see the trend and stop game?
Hardly.
Google (or any service provider) *has* to respond to your copyright claims if they want to protect themselves legally. Just because the first, second and third claims against you turned out to be false doesn't preclude the fourth claim from being legit. Once a service provider chooses to become judge and jury and they start making decisions on which sites are legit - they open themselves up to all sorts of legal problems and throw out the protection the DMCA affords them.
quote:
Couldn't you as the counter filer point out to Google that it has gone back and forth X amounts of time and is now a court issue?
Sure you can, but they don't give a rats a$$ about what you're telling them.
You're going to be dealing with the legal department (if the provider is large enough to have one). These folks don't like putting much more in writing than is absolutely necessary. Telling them you hold the copyright doesn't hold any legal weight. Again, they are not going to spend time investigating thousands of issues and expose themselves legally when all they need to do is keep track of 2 things.
1. Site A has DMCA complaint - pull it out.
2. Site A has Counter Notice - reinsert it.
I can see why you may think it was a naive question because common sense tells us copyright problems shouldn't be so difficult. But, proving ownership can be tricky without an actual registered copyright.
Take syndicated or otherwise newsworthy articles. Quite often the article is quickly spread across the internet and thousands of sites before the source site even has the article indexed by the search engines. In this case, without a registered copyright, how does the source site easily prove to a service provider that they are the copyright owner? They don't. Proof is left to the courts.
quote:
Ask for your help
LOL. I was thinking more along the lines of "if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen".
If someone/somegroup has determined to wreck your business you need to make a VERY IMPORTANT decision at this time. Do you stay and run a crippled business? Do you just leave that field of competition? Or, do you set off a nuke and level the playing field?
Hat and sunglasses - $25
Cricket phone - $100
Trip to large town internet cafe - $200
Look on competition faces when their sites are DMCA removed from the SERPs - Priceless
_____________________________
Split Testing
Chicago Order Fulfillment
Emergency Kits
| |
|
|
|
notepage
Posts: 33
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/12/2005 19:06:17
quote:
This is where Notepage's original post in the hints & tips forum is very useful in sorting out all you need to do before you approach your competitor, so that when you do contact the copyright breacher, you're already armed for the next step in the process which in this case would seem to be the courts. You don't want to get all angry and tell them straight away, it'll only serve to give them the upper hand in any legal action, or at best put them at the same stage as you are at in that regard.
That is correct. We found it extremely helpful that all emails were sent simultaneously. It got the "offenders" attention. They received emails from organizations they participated in, their registration service, hosting provider all asking to respond to our claim. Along with the cease and desist, they were very quick to respond.
Having the information really makes a difference so you know the leverage that you have, if their host is in a country that doesn't respect copyright laws, it will be more difficult, knowing this ahead of time is a definite advantage.
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6121
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/13/2005 4:10:17
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mojo
Does this sound far fetched to you? It's not. It has happened to me more than once and has happened to others that I have spoken with.
It gets very frustrating when DMCAs are filed in succession. BOOM - you're out. Wait, wait, wait - you're back in. BOOM - you're out again. Repeat.
How would you defend this?
I'm amazed that you haven't murdered someone..... you haven't have you?
It seems incredible that the person making the original claim does not have to prove who they are and what they are - copyright details, bank letters whatever.
It's hard enough to get decent SERPs results with all the spammers around (that Google doesn't seem to touch) and with Google Bowling and other such amusing pastimes. *sigh*
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
Mojo
Posts: 2431
From: Chicago
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/13/2005 10:38:06
quote:
I'm amazed that you haven't murdered someone..... you haven't have you?
The first couple of times it happened it was very frustrating I admit. Now, I am on auto pilot.
All it takes is for some moron to stumble into the DMCA, figure it out and your site is in trouble.
quote:
It seems incredible that the person making the original claim does not have to prove who they are and what they are - copyright details, bank letters whatever.
Yep. Some people don't believe me. They just can't get their minds around the fact that copyright law protection can be used as such a powerful weapon. Recently, a talented SEO had his personal site removed for a DMCA violation. I suggested what to do, others advised there were better methods to solve the problem. Eventually, he filed a Counter Notice (as I advised) and in a couple of weeks he was back. Easy as pie.
_____________________________
Split Testing
Chicago Order Fulfillment
Emergency Kits
| |
|
|
|
Mojo
Posts: 2431
From: Chicago
Status: offline
|
RE: Regarding Copyright - 7/13/2005 13:20:50
quote:
It just seems laughable that if after 10 volleys (example) that the ISP and Google say enough...settle it in court and stop wasting our time.
They do, in a way. After the Counter Notice they should put things back the way they were. But, there is just no way the service provider can say "stop". If a different copyright complaint, from a different person/company arrives they can only do one thing - Remove the infringing material until a Counter Notice arrives.
quote:
are you saying the first couple of murders were frustrating?
Just the first... kidding.
If you're willing to fight fire with fire you can often end the conflict after just one volley. If you can't figure out who is filing the DMCA (you will usually not be told) you need to get M.A.D.
from wikipedia on Mutually Assured Destruction:
quote:
The doctrine further assumes that neither side will dare to launch a first strike because the other side will launch on warning (also called fail-deadly) or with secondary forces (second strike) resulting in the destruction of both parties. The payoff of this doctrine is expected to be a tense but stable peace.
quote:
mind boggeling
Amen.
_____________________________
Split Testing
Chicago Order Fulfillment
Emergency Kits
| |
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version 
'Send the boys round' from OF - that'd scare 'em off pretty sharpish. 
........
......
