News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by cft on Monday October 15, 2012 @08:33PM (#4657833)
It appears to be true, until you look at this graph: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/ The number of DMCA requests is exponentially rising. Many of them are bogus, too broad and request removal of the entire domain. There are no effective legal penalties for overly broad requests. If you operate a large hosting or web company, it is unfortunately becoming economically unfeasible to examine each request to narrow down its scope and/or to even determine its legitimacy, and the most cost-efficient route is to comply blindly. This is not to say that ServerBeach is a good hosting company: I hope it's a good lesson for them: turning off such a large customer without getting on the phone with them is setting a precedent that is suicidal for their business.
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by csomar on Tuesday October 16, 2012 @01:31AM (#4658568)
That might be also the end of DMCA. If anyone figured out that they can abuse the system, the hosting company may receive enough requests that it can go out of business and instead not comply until the sender take more serious legal action.
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by chii on Monday October 15, 2012 @10:49PM (#4658246)
I htink a solution might be to have to pay a fee that is proportional to the scope of the dmca take down request?
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by wmf on Tuesday October 16, 2012 @01:14AM (#4658540)
Unfortunately the DMCA isn't written that way. You can't charge any fees.
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by DanBC on Tuesday October 16, 2012 @01:32AM (#4658571)
Even after the event for DMCA notices that are clearly incorrect or bogus or malicious?
Re:Pearson takes down 1.5 million teacher/student blogs with... by saraid216 on Tuesday October 16, 2012 @03:07AM (#4658716)
That's not a fee (which would disincentive filing DMCA notices in the first place), but rather a compensation for damages (which puts the burden of proof on the victim).