Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

YouTube Reposts Anti-Scientology Videos

Posted by timothy on Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:38 AM
from the fun-and-easy-to-destroy-stuff dept.
Ian Lamont writes "YouTube has reposted anti-Scientology videos and reinstated suspended YouTube accounts after receiving thousands of apparently bogus DCMA take-down notices. Four thousand notices were sent to YouTube last Thursday and Friday by American Rights Counsel, LLC. After YouTube users responded with counter-notices, many of the videos were reposted. It turns out that the American Rights Counsel had no copyright claim on the videos, and the group may not even exist, although the text of the DCMA notices have been linked to a Wikipedia editor. While filing a false DMCA notice is a criminal offense, prosecution in these cases rarely comes about."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] 4,000 Anti-Scientology Videos Yanked From YouTube 658 comments
An anonymous reader writes "From the EFF webpage: 'Over a period of twelve hours, between this Thursday night and Friday morning, American Rights Counsel LLC sent out over 4000 DMCA takedown notices to YouTube, all making copyright infringement claims against videos with content critical of the Church of Scientology.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by jcr (53032) <jcr@@@mac...com> on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:41AM (#24933541) Journal

    This isn't one count, it's about four thousand counts of fraud. I'm sure that complying with the takedown notices cost Google a non-trivial amount of money, too.

    -jcr

    • by IP_Troll (1097511) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:51AM (#24933701)
      I believe the most fitting punishment would be to revoke all Scientology related copyrights.

      This is an arguable criminal case and a criminal prosecution would be a waste of time. It is going to be near impossible to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

      It is, however, a clear abuse of rights granted by the copyright law. The fitting punishment is revocation of those rights.


      Please save the nitpicking arguments about if there is such thing as copyright "rights", that is beside the point. If a child can't be trusted with privileges, you take those privileges away.
      • by initdeep (1073290) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:58AM (#24933793)

        revoking the copyrights would be moronic.

        if that's all it took, then people would start posting fake notices (ie committing fraud) for the groups they OPPOSE, thus preventing the legitimate copyright holder from keeping their copyright.

        punish the criminal.
        in this case that is whoever sent the notices.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 09 2008, @12:04PM (#24933863)

      Exactly. It might be economically worth their time for Google to set the precedent that bogus DMCA notices en masse will lead to a lawsuit, so that they can limit the number of staff they'll have to hire to handle requests.

      • by LithiumX (717017) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @12:15PM (#24934027)

        They are honestly going to let Scientology get away with this bollocks? Wow. That sucks. It'd be funny to finally see themselves sucker punch their own faces by trying.

        Now I'm left wondering if it was even them that sent them out in the first place.

        Does anyone know anything about the "group" that sent them, and is there anything that actually ties it to them?

        For all the reasons they'd have to do it, there's also a lot of people who'd like to embarrass that group by acting in their name.

  • Take that Xenu! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Abreu (173023) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:41AM (#24933557)

    I'm glad that the YouTube users fought back.
    We really need to make people aware of the criminal actions of this cult.

  • Teach them a lesson (Score:5, Informative)

    by gooman (709147) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:43AM (#24933587) Journal

    While filing a false DMCA notice is a criminal offense, prosecution in these cases rarely comes about.

    Sounds like this would be a good time to start.
    I can't think of a nicer group of people to sue.

    • by d3ac0n (715594) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:54AM (#24933745)

      I can't think of a nicer group of people to sue.

      Actually, it would be "prosecute", not sue, as this is a criminal offense, and requires a criminal prosecution.

      All nitpicking aside though, I agree. It sounds like the crazy Scientologists are at it again, and SOMEONE needs to take those crazies down a few notches.

  • by S7urm (126547) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:52AM (#24933725)

    Not just to file fraudulant DMCA notices, but also to do so in the name of a Business that doesn't exist? I'd think someone, somewhere would want to take this opportunity to finally push back and sue for false allegations filed by a fradulant company in the name of an entity that was not part of the original notice. Might make a statement, (especially from YouTube) that we won't simply allow people to negligently file take down notices on material they don't even own the copyright to.

  • by megamerican (1073936) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:54AM (#24933735)

    Earlier this year radio talk show host Michael Reagan called for the murder of Mark Dice [youtube.com] live on air. Mark Dice uploaded a 3 minute clip of the death threat to youtube. Reagan's lawyers filed a DMCA claim on the clip [jonesreport.com], youtube took down Mark Dice's entire channel which had a lot of original content and over a million views. Dice tried to counter claim but youtube did NOT reinstate his channel. Dice had to make a new channel and upload his content back.

    The FBI or police would not charge Reagan for his death threats and Reagan is still on the air.

  • Google Should Sue (Score:5, Interesting)

    by whisper_jeff (680366) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:57AM (#24933789)
    Given the amount of resources (time) that Google's lost in dealing with these (4000!) bogus DMCA notices, I think Google should file a lawsuit against the offending party. Obviously, I'd love to see the people who posted the videos start a class-action suit as well, but I think Google having to deal with the paperwork, remove the videos, deal with the counter-claim paperwork, and repost the videos represents a significant loss of time and thus money, all because someone is abusing the DMCA. Were I Google's lawyers, I'd use this situation as a perfect chance to deliver a message to all copyright holders - get it right or deal with OUR lawsuit.
  • by MikeRT (947531) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @12:01PM (#24933833) Homepage

    While filing a false DMCA notice is a criminal offense, prosecution in these cases rarely comes about."

    Anyone should be able to bring evidence to a judge, and bring charges against someone in a felony or serious misdemeanor case. If someone shuts down your YouTube account via false DMCA notices, and a US Attorney won't take it, you should be able to hire your own prosecutor to press charges against the individual.

    You know one major reason why this would be hard as hell to get passed? Because if it were passed it would not only pressure legislatures to write better, more consistent legal codes, but it would allow for pesky things like drug cops in cases like Kathryn Johnston's shooting death to be tried for manslaughter, perjury in securing the warrant and criminal negligence leading to injury or death.

  • by rekoil (168689) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @12:06PM (#24933895)

    They now have the names and addresses of the posters who responsed with DMCA counter-notices, and those individuals are now free to be "fair-gamed".

    • Re:Of course. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by g0dsp33d (849253) on Tuesday September 09 2008, @11:53AM (#24933727)
      I wouldn't call it evil. If they get a notice they have to presume its real, they don't have time to research 4,000 claims. Faking take down notices is fraud or criminal (not sure as IANAL). Since they have to assume they're legit they're doing the right thing by taking them down. Re-instating them is done when a counter-claim is received. They're just obeying the law, albeit a fairly poorly written one.
    • by mrchaotica (681592) * on Tuesday September 09 2008, @12:15PM (#24934023)

      As geeks, shouldn't we be more annoyed at the obviously non-scientific "big three" religions?

      • Despite the name, "Scientology" is no more scientific than Christianity. It is more sci-fi, but that's not the same thing.
      • At the moment, mainstream Christianity isn't trying to suppress non-Christian free speech ("ID" dumbasses notwithstanding).
      • At the moment, Christianity isn't run for profit (Roman Catholic church notwithstanding).