On 6/5/13, Sameer Khosla <skhosla@neutraldata.com> wrote:
My personal favorite is the number of notices that we receive as DMCA takedown notices, citing the specific laws.
Heh... In an ideal world; you'd provide them an "agent" for copyright takedown requests, that they must send canadian postal mail to, with the request, and a notarized signed statement taken under penalty of perjury; no e-mail, because you can't e-mail a check, AND you can't authenticate the signature on an e-mail --- the sender can always repudiate it claiming the penalty doesn't apply to them, because that message was sent by accident (therefore false messages would not be under a penalty, therefore.... invalid notices). In addition, to the signed letter, require a check to cover processing and takedown ~ $100 processing per URL/domain/customer, required to process the legal request, plus 24 hours of time after check clears in order to give advance notification to the customer, and hosting fee for that customer for 14 days -- to cover the refund to the customer: after the customer has provided the provider with a copy of their counternotice. I suspect 'erroneous' and 'faulty' notices, or 'maliciously false' notices intended to suppress (strategic copyright letters against public participation), would greatly diminish: were all providers to require such a thing as a manually written signature from a human, for each letter: in a tangible paper form, not electronically transmitted.
Most of the notices come from people who are unable to comprehend that US Laws don't apply outside of the US. Sk. -- -JH