Not a lawyer but isn’t it your rights to protect your copyright? As in, if you file fraudulent notices, YT removes you ability to file more, then you have a legitimate notice to file, now you presumably can sue YT for denying you the right to defend your copyright.

Tough shit, you shouldn’t have sent the three fraudulent ones then. It’s all in the terms of service you have agreed to.

Youtube would probably be violating dmca safe harbor if they required claimants to agree to their terms of service.

Ideally, this would be written into law.

I mean I don’t disagree with you as a person. I am saying that YT might be hesitant to take this stance because the legal system might not share this sentiment. That’s for their lawyers to figure out.

> isn’t it your rights to protect your copyright?

Sure. But you don't have the right to harass people who haven't done so. I'm obviously not a lawyer, but I would imagine that at some point, vexatious litigation protections ought to kick in.

Look at Nintendo, they're creating opportunities even when they try to stop anyone from using their things.

And who decides a claim was fraudulent? Historically, the fraudulent claims have gotten away with it while the target has at least had to remove the video or at worst had their accounts banned. Yet, nothing happened to the fraudster.

...until you spoof a new e-mail address. That won't scale well.

The DMCA takedown form can also request identity confirmation.

Require registered law firms to file these.

Yes, it'll cost money. But these fraudulent claims cost money, too.