EFF Launches Takedown Hall Of Shame
from the who-will-be-inducted-next? dept
With so many organizations trying to use copyright and trademark law to take content offline, the EFF is announcing the launch of its new Takedown Hall Of Shame, highlighting "the most egregious examples of takedown abuse." You'll recognize the names on the list -- as every one of them we've written about here. Who knows if this will cause lawyers to think twice before issuing bogus takedowns (I doubt it), but at least it should shine some light on how widely copyright and trademark law are abused to stifle speech.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, hall of shame, takedowns, trademark
Companies: eff
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
And every year...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The EFF Needs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I presume that those who would be asserting the takedown know that it likely won't work. But still, there are many stupid entities out there that might try one. These days you never know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(f) Misrepresentations.— Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section—
(1) that material or activity is infringing, or
(2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,
shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.
There is a price to be paid for truly "bogus" notices, as has been noted and imposed in at least OPG v. Diebold, a copy of which can be found at:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/OPG_v_Diebold/OPG%20v.%20Diebold%20ruling.pdf
BTW, DMCA takedowns are properly limited to copyright law. Any such notice that is filed based upon trademark law is clearly outside the reach of the DMCA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I suppose this is how they get around the sanctions and are still able to either make others pay money in settlements or threaten to make them endure a long and expensive lawsuit, even if the entities being sued would eventually win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps EFF is hoping for a DMCA takedown notice?
Since they received it, they would immediately be a party to it. They could show the world how they feel a take down notice _should_ be handled. As a bonus, since they obviously think the items they host were recipients of bogus take down requests in order for them to post it themselves, they can sue for damages and help establish the case law to allow others to easily successfully sue overzealous entities.
From the EFF's point of view it's a win/win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who knows if this will cause lawyers to think twice before issuing bogus takedowns
GET REAL! An attorney works for hire - the HIRING ENTITY is the culprit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who knows if this will cause lawyers to think twice before issuing bogus takedowns
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
take this down
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]