[mythtv-users] Who needs to worry about copyright? CoreAVC for Linux removed from Google Code

[Christopher X. Candreva]

On Tue, 6 May 2008, David Brodbeck wrote:

> Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
> > No, just until the owner of the site fires off the boilerplate 
> > counter-notice saying, under penalty of purgery, that to the best of 
> > their knowledge it does not violate the DMCA.  Then the provider puts it 
> > back, and the two entities go back to dukeing it out.

> Assuming you have an ISP that's willing to go to bat for you, legally.

Please stop spreading FUD -- this is just not how the DMCA works, and while 
I'm not wild about most of it, this is NOT the problem a lot of people are 
making it out to be.

This is the "Safe Harbor Provision" of the DMCA. It's designed to protect 
ISPs (ie -- ME) .   Yes, we have take down material when we get a notice, 
but by the same token, we put it back when we get a counter-notice. There 
are explicit provisions for this, designed to protect the ISP from liability 
when we receive a counter-notice.  We're not going to bat for anyone --  the 
owner of the site takes responsibility by submitting the counter-notice.

Now, this isn't to say that ISPs don't make mistakes. But at least the DMCA 
spells out clearly what a copyright owner has to do to get their material 
taken down, and what recourse the site owner has. In this respect the DMCA 
was a vast improvement -- download the counter-notice boilerpate, fire it 
off, and you are done.

The alternative was a subpoena, which still resulted in your site comming 
down and all the resulting damage to your repuatation -- with no easy 
recourse to get it back up.



==========================================================
Chris Candreva  -- chris at westnet.com -- (914) 948-3162
WestNet Internet Services of Westchester
http://www.westnet.com/