This is not good enough. I wonder if they'll backflip on "Shopify is replacing customer service with AI chatbots"[1].

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/153z5r7/shopify_is_...

This could easily be fixed by having a consequence to fake DMCA reports. A fine or something. Something messed up that Youtube does is when someone files a copyright claim they get to take the money from your video. I have had times when I was sent a copyright strike for videos I have made and when I check my video is usually much older than the music that I am being accused of stealing.

I always win these disputes for obvious reasons but Youtube has never offered to make things right.

Basically the accused is guilty until proven innocent which is not how it should be.

Wait, is youtube still doing that? I thought they moved to putting the money in escrow until the dispute was settled, which cut down on the majority of the false claims?

It’s been a couple years since my last attempted strike but it’s good to hear that they are trying solutions. Maybe that’s why I haven’t gotten one in a while.

Part of the problem is many of these companies have a faux DCMA process.

Rather than use the “official” DCMA process, they build a reporting mechanism in front of it. People can abuse it without facing federal repercussions.

Somehow this issue always seems to arise when forming agreements with large platforms.

Isn't a fake DMCA report "lying for profit" AKA fraud? AFAIK this already a crime and could be prosecuted.

DMCA claims are made under penalty of perjury. Perjury is usually a felony.

To blindly listen to anonymous reports on the internet is not good faith. Shopify has a duty to handle these in good faith and it’s infinitely foreseeable that this bad faith conduct could result in serious damage to their customers (as you explain).

> asking to verify a phone number or upload an ID

I’m pretty sure they’re not legally allowed to add extra requirements like this. If they were, sites could make it almost impossible to take things down by adding a lot of requirements

As I learned from this comment [0], that kind of is a requirement. Section 512 requires a notice contain:

> Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number and email address

I think another poster hit the nail on the head, when they said (and I'm paraphrasing), these aren't real DMCA takedowns. They're a different system these hosters bend to that acts outside of it. By being more liberal in what gets shut down, they comply with DMCA which is much more onerous on what is required to shut things down.

In fact, if this was really the DMCA process, people would have legal standing to go after the accusers via Section 512.

Further, I'm also pretty sure you don't have to take things down right away. You do have time to investigate the alleged violation and decide whether you are in the right.

Basically, all these players are hiding behind systems they put in place so they wouldn't come close to DMCA issues or have to pay anyone to investigate notices.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37986095

Has anyone managed to prove that an email address is not "reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party"?

I doubt it. I expect that Shopify doubts it, too.

The law itself is explicit, no one needs to prove what the word "and" means.

> such as an address, telephone number and email address

In this context, I think "and" could be reasonably argued to mean either "and" or "or". And given that the purpose of the contact information is "Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party" and not for identity verification, I'd guess that no company is willing to go to court to test this.

And means and. Arguing that and means or is an interesting strategy I suppose but and means and.

But is "and" being used to form a set of acceptable forms of identification (any of which would be sufficient), or is it joining the forms of identification together as all being required?

It's joining them all together, but the whole thing is presented as an example. Any avenue that provides the ability to contact presumably meets that standard.

If Shopify were to alter their contact info requirement, it would clearly be with a different goal in mind than the one laid out in that sentence. That's assuming of course, that the current requirements have actually led to communication.

Coming back to add, I think the following sentences have identical meanings:

"Acceptable forms of identification include driver's license, passport, and birth certificate."

"Acceptable forms of identification include driver's license, passport, or birth certificate."

This is currently being debated in the highest court of the USA, right now as we speak. It’s pretty dumb and absurd to us techies but apparently it’s not a settled matter in law.

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/supreme-court-first-step-ac...

> Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number and email address

The words "information reasonably sufficient" set the bar of compliance. The list is an example, not an explicit requirement; hence the words "such as".

These companies need to be dismantled. Every small shop this happens to should focus on documentation and suing for damages. This is negligence.

That does sound unbearable. May I ask what market segment you operate in? Do you make your own products or are you rebranding some kind of generics?