Automated DMCA Notices Still Full of Lies 513
dbaker writes "The MPAA filed a DMCA takedown notice against Superconnect, a software company. The letter is available here that demands the removal of roughly 120K of open-source TCL code that they believe to be a 'copyrighted motion pictures.' This is definitely a surprising case of the guilty until proven innocent world that the DMCA provides." And yet another: enrico_suave writes "The Entertainment Software Association falsely accuses the Interactive Fiction archive of pirating Doom 3. doom3.zip is a 114kb freeware DOS game from 1988. Reminiscent of when the RIAA sent C & D's to a Professor Usher who had an usher.mp3 file posted on his website."
News For Nerds that Slashdot Wont Discuss - Part 2 (Score:0, Interesting)
Is Linus secretly working for Microsoft? [forbes.com]
Critical security flaws in Kerberos found in Unix, Linux, and Mac OS [com.com]. Windows not affected.
The thing is, that I seem to remember a day when Slashdot was open and honest enough to discuss all sides of the issues. I guess this post will get whacked by an editor and my IP will get banned. Oh well... there are much better blogs out there nowadays anyway.
Why Not Try To Screw The RIAA/MPAA? (Score:5, Interesting)
Experiment... (Score:5, Interesting)
Harassment? (Score:5, Interesting)
INAL to the extreme, so I may be way off base here, but it seems like wasting peoples' time and resources like this should make you open to such suits.
Sue (Score:5, Interesting)
This is ridiculous. The MPAA is sending off threatening legal letters to anyone who might even look suspicious.
Thank you, DMCA!
OT (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, I'm in the UK. What about now?
I think I know the answers - but it's a cheap way to get some insight. And a good way to start a discussion. And hopefully a fight. (It's Friday night here, but I'm indoors cos I feel like shit.)
Are we ready for a 'loser pays' system yet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Can't this work in reverse? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:we hereby state... (Score:3, Interesting)
DMCA Honeypot (Score:5, Interesting)
Then I could see just how many automated C&D letters I could generate!
That would be fun. If only I had the time to deal with deluge of C&D letters.
Re:Why Not Try To Screw The RIAA/MPAA? (Score:5, Interesting)
Two reasons. First, the letters are sent out automatically to people who are flagged during their internet robots' scans across the internet. There isn't a guy typing these up and spending time looking for warez. Secondly, I like to know what my files are, and how I keep track of that is with understandable file names. So it makes no point to start labeling all my files "starcraft.zip".
Re:Why Not Try To Screw The RIAA/MPAA? (Score:4, Interesting)
Good Faith? (Score:5, Interesting)
On behalf of the respective owners of the exclusive rights to the copyright ed material at issue in this notice, we hereby state, pursuant to the Digit al Millennium Copyright Act, Title 17 United States Code Section 512, that the information in this notification is accurate and that we have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owners, their respective agents, or the law.
Anyone know how loosely interpretable the term "good faith belief" is? It seems like it would be trivial to prove (say, in court) that they obviously do NOT have any good faith belief, and that this is simply the result of some mindless spidering program. In a perfect world, you'd be able to force them into spending a little more money policing themselves, and every little bit counts, right?
I know this would be better suited as a reply but. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:we hereby state... (Score:2, Interesting)
"Is ANYONE that's gotten one of these ever going to call them on this bullshit and have them sent to jail for perjury?"
The problem with that strategy is that there will be no perjury, because the whole claim will be dismissed at the first hearing.
Re:Why Not Try To Screw The RIAA/MPAA? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this is a great idea, I will begin post the files.
Re:Why Not Try To Screw The RIAA/MPAA? (Score:2, Interesting)
I think this should be taken to a competition level. The one to attract the most of these wins a prize. =)
Is it really automated?? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, we replied back to them, told them of their idiocy, and got a somewhat reasonable apology back - but nothing like what it SHOULD have been based on the language and severe tone of their warning.
This questions what really is automated and what has at least some human intervention. Of course, they should have realized that the entire X-Files series doesn't fit in a 113k file.
Re:Well, I think it's actually pretty funny. (Score:5, Interesting)
That would be an interesting protest. If a whole crapload of people were to setup file structures like that on ie, free hosting providers, isp webspace accounts, whatever, it would act as kind of a DDoS attack against their process, with the two pronged effect of getting the ISPs completely irritated at having to deal with hundreds or thousands of C&D's that are all groundless - which would hopefully lead to the ISPs either ignoring them, or lobbying for some kind of law that restricts their behaviour
Re:DMCA Honeypot (Score:3, Interesting)
It would be far too much of a headache if/when I started getting C&D spammed, but the end result would be oh so entertaining if there's any justice left in the universe.
Re:we hereby state... (Score:2, Interesting)
Not to be a nitpicker (Score:3, Interesting)
Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
Disney Enterprises, Inc.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.
Paramount Pictures Corporation
TriStar Pictures, Inc.
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation
United Artists Pictures, Inc.
United Artists Corporation
Universal City Studios, LLLP
Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
Re:Good Faith? (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Get congresspeople and senators to add another act to either counter or ammend the law in question.
2) Get the supreme court to repeal them (or sections thereof)
The problem is that 1 is almost impossible with the current state of (legal) corruption in congress/the senate.
The problem with 2 is that in order for it to even get to the Supreme Court, somebody needs to convert it into a constitutional issue. Even then, it takes a terribly huge amount of money to hire attorneys of the caliber required to convince the panel of judges that the law in question really is unconstitutional.
With regards to the DMCA, you're not in any worse situation than any other law, but you're not in a good situation either... Some of the brightest legal minds in the country have tried to make the DMCA a constitutional issue and get the Supreme court to repeal it or sections of it. It hasn't worked yet... and there is not a lot of hope that it will in the future either.
Re:Under Penalty of Perjery ... (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Wow! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:They should send a reply like this... (Score:3, Interesting)
The Berne Convention means that US copyright does apply in other countries, with different time limits (a country can make something public-domain after fifty years, even if it is still copyrighted in the United States). Shrek 2 is definitely newer than 50 years.
Re:DMCA Honeypot (Score:2, Interesting)
About the RIAA Pit of Confusion [stodge.org].
And an example [stodge.org].
The source code is available and patches / improvements are most welcome.
Actually I think it COULD be seen as purjury (Score:5, Interesting)
The MPAA also states in their letter (in the excerpt shown in the grandparent to this post) that they are authorised to act on behalf of the owner of the exclusive rights to the material in question. The material in question really belongs to Mr. Kiviniemi, and I really doubt he authorised the MPAA on his behalf, so that assertion is also false.
I think that if they can't be charged with purjury then at the very least some or all of the recipients of these letters should pursue a court order to forbid the MPAA from sending legally threatening letters with blatantly flase information to innocent people. In any case, the MPAA should be banned from using a computerised system to scan file repositories and automatically issue such threats. The MPAA should be required to MANUALLY EXAMINE EVERY FILE they discover by automated means before making such bold assertions to minimise false accusations.
Re:Actually I think it COULD be seen as purjury (Score:4, Interesting)
Whoever signs these notices has to also include the following under the DMCA:
Automated systems do not have 'good faith beliefs', and the person/entity signing is opening themselves up to a lawsuit/countersuit if they rely solely on automated systems.Re:They should send a reply like this... (Score:5, Interesting)
ADV's letter:
June 22, 2004
RE: http://mirkx.com
To Whom It May Concern:
This office represents A.D. Vision, Inc. (ADV) and its affiliated companies that own and/or are exclusively licensed to use the following protected work (the "Protected Work"):
Azumanga Daioh
DN Angel
Getter Robo Armageddon
Kaleido Star
Kimagure Orange Road
King of Bandit Jing
Pretear
Puni Puni Poemy
RahXephon
Saint Seiya
Through our Internet monitoring program, we recently discovered unauthorized use of our Protected Work in connection with your website (mirkx.com) (the "Site"). Specifically, the Protected Work is being offered for Internet download, copying and distribution through a Bit Torrent server, and potentially through a File Transfer Protocol server.
Our intellectual property rights are our most valuable assets. In order to promote a cooperative and beneficial relationship with fans, ADV prefers to send out written requests such as this first, rather than institute litigation or request that your ISP disable your Site. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unauthorized copying and distribution of ADV's protected works (including images) constitutes an infringement of one or more of ADV's rights under the copyright laws of the United States, Canada and other jurisdictions throughout the world. Applicable law provides for substantial penalties for such infringement, including injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and damages. ADV has instituted litigation in the past, and in every such litigation, ADV prevailed. If necessary, ADV will not hesitate to take such action again to insure that its rights are fully protected.
Therefore, without limiting any right, remedy or defense available to us, ADV MUST ASK THAT YOU IMMEDIATELY:
1) Delete and cease all further use of the Protected Work, and any other unauthorized ADV works, from the Site.
2) Remove and delete all copies of the Protected Work, and any other unauthorized ADV titles, from any other distribution channel owned, operated or otherwise controlled or accessible by you or those to whom you grant access including other web sites, FTP servers, web-based storage services, peer-to-peer systems and the like (each of the foregoing being a "Channel").
3) Remove and delete all references, pointers and hypertext links pertaining to infringing copies of the Protected Work from all such Channels.
If you are unsure of whether any other titles related with your Site are ADV Protected Works, or you would like to be more pro-active in your awareness of our licensed titles for future reference, please check with the official ADV site www.advfilms.com or our customer service department.
We also ask that you please advise us in writing within five (5) days from the date of this notice as to whether you will comply with our request so that we can determine whether any additional action will be required beyond this point. I trust this will receive your prompt attention, and if there is anything I can help you with in future, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Enforcement Team
Anti-Piracy Division
A.D. Vision, Inc.
And the reply:
Public reply from mirKx.com: (06.28.2004)
MirKx.com is not under North American's laws. It is unfortunate that this Site is available in North America, since it has only been made for Comoro Islands' inhabitants, where mirKx.com is acting from. Moreover, the referenced international copyright laws don't apply, since the Comoro Islands:
- didn't sign the International Berne Convention of 1886
- is not a state member of the WIPO.
MirKx.com is acting as an AUTOMATIC index of links, and the Protected Work you make reference to are NOT hosted on this server. If y
Re:Dreamworks vs The Pirate Bay :-) (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's their mail and reply:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/dreamworks
Short and to the point.
Whoops, here's the reply:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/dreamworks_respons
I quoted the parent so you don't need to mod it up if you were thinking about it; not trying to karma whore by splitting my messages up.
Re:Libel (Score:4, Interesting)
Then when a takedown notice comes along from one of these organizations, and the MP3 is played in a court case showing it isn't one of their songs, it becomes a bad faith takedown notice under 17 USC 512(f) for which the party demanding takedown is liable for damages due to any injury caused by the takedown as well as costs and attorney's fees. If it can be shown that all that would have been necessary to show it wasn't infringing was to examine the file and see (say by file size, or by playing it) then it is obvious bad faith and actionable.
MPAA Trap Script (Score:3, Interesting)
Take that, MPAA!
http://www.scovetta.com/projects/mpaa-trap/index.
ESA did it again (Score:1, Interesting)
[Blah blah blah legal stuff]
Infringement Detail:
Infringing Work: Spider-Man
Filepath: Spiderman 1988.torrent|Regular/
Filename: 03 Spectacular Spider-Man - #134.cbr
First Found: 24 Aug 2004 22:04:36 EDT (GMT -0400)
Last Found: 25 Aug 2004 06:04:42 EDT (GMT -0400)
Filesize: 12,076k
IP Address: 156.143.133.64
IP Port: 6881
Network: BTPeers
Protocol: BitTorrent
Infringing Work: Spider-Man
Filepath: Spiderman 1988.torrent|Regular/
Filename: 06 Spectacular Spider-Man - #135.cbr
First Found: 24 Aug 2004 22:04:36 EDT (GMT -0400)
Last Found: 25 Aug 2004 06:04:43 EDT (GMT -0400)
Filesize: 11,664k
IP Address: 156.143.133.64
IP Port: 6881
Network: BTPeers
Protocol: BitTorrent
[and then a bunch more files]
The network admin noticed something was up, but not enough to stop from posting the message on the campus's e-message boards. The file was on a computer on the main backbone of the network, not the student network.
Then he discovered it was in the CCLC, also known as the FURMAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. So, we've either got a really smart guy doing P2P in the library where he can't get busted, or we've got a bum infringement notice.
Going back up to the filesize info, you see that the files are miniscule, NOT the size of the Spiderman game. D'oh.
We're guessing they are copies of the Spiderman comics from the late '80s. Perhaps someone is copyright-infringing, but the ESA is *not* the one who should be concerned.
Needless to say, they still got their way--the computer was disconnected from the Internet for at least a little while, as is usual for takedown notices. I'd be extremely pissed if they did that to my computer, and I'm now tempted to make and upload a "doom3.zip" bogus folder, just to see what happens . . .
I got the same notice.. (Score:2, Interesting)
If anyone's interested, I have the letter and my reply [tinyurl.com] up.
Re:we hereby state... (Score:1, Interesting)
Obviously you're not familiar with people employed by the MPAA.
If they were fired and the work outsourced India it would result in higher quality. These people are incompetant boobs who get their jobs because they know someone who knows someone, or are someone's nephew, and similar "qualifications." Then won't get fired no matter how horrifically they do their job due to those political connections.
Re:we hereby state... (Score:3, Interesting)
You can only do it in relation to your own copyrights. If you're creative it wouldn't be hard to arrange to file such a notice against pretty much anyone, a senator, the MPAA, the RIAA, whoever.
Get obnoxious enough
Try it once against pretty much anyone and you should be fine. Intentionally get 'obnoxious' and file multiple obviously frivolous notices and a judge will rule that you failed even the absurdly low threshhold of "reasonable belief" to justify such a notice and you'll get smacked down.
If you're willing to accept the consequences you could drive home how seriously fuxord this law is by filing a takedown notice against Bush's and/or Kerry's entire website a few days before the election.
-
Get out of jail free card (Score:3, Interesting)
A lot of people have posted comments about nailing the RIAA/MPAA etc. for purgery or liable. I have another idea.
When "they" repeatedly do stuff like this, it lowers their credibility.
Does even the spider download the actual files?
It seems to me that if someone was actually hosting infringing material, after getting a Cease and Desist letter, they can just change the file. Use the same filename, but replace it with something silly, like a tarball of your slashdot journals, or an mp3 of yourself reading the fair use clause of the US Constitution.
And if lots of people put out files like this that were not infringing in the first place, then it would make it more difficult to determine who actually was infringing and who was acting as a decoy.
At the very least it would force them to have a human being confirm that a particular person is really infringing, and to save the evidence, before they start sending threatening letters, and I think we can all agree that would be a good thing.