Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Safe Harbor > Notices > Kundera finds unauthorized translation unbearable (NoticeID 4484) Printer-friendly version

Kundera finds unauthorized translation unbearable

June 26, 2006

 

Sender Information:
Milan Kundera
Sent by: General Manager
DILIA Theatre and Literary Agency
190 03, Prague, 9, Czech Rep

Recipient Information:
[Private]
Google, Inc. [Blogger]
Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA


Sent via: mail
Re: Infringement of authors rights

Dear Sirs,

let us contact you on behalf of our client, Milan Kundera. We are a Czech agency representing authors of literary, theatre and audio-visual works and also a collective management organisation, member of CISAC and GESAC. As you surely know, Milan Kundera is a famous czech writer, who lives in France, Milan Kundera is the author of a novel called ?L?Identit??, originally written in French language.

We would like to express regret for the fact, that on the web site http://www.totoznost.blogspot.com/, which your company operates, we found a Czech translation of above mentioned work, Unfortunately, Milan Kundera has not translated this work into Czech language and has not granted the consent to translate this work into Czech language to someone else, Milan Kundera has not even authorised your company to communicate this work to the public on the Internet.

In that respect we would like to point out that United States as well as Czech Republic and France are a Panics to Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. According to Article 8 of Berne Convention, authors of literary works shall enjoy the exclusive right of making and of authorising the translation of their works. As the said translation of the work haven?t been authorised by Milan Kundera, a communication of the translation to the public on the Internet constitutes an infringement of Milan Kundera?s authors rights.

With regard to above mentioned infringement of Milan Kundera?s authors rights, we are hereby asking you to stop any further unauthorised using of the said translation of Milan Kundera?s novel "L?Identit?", particularly to cancel the web site http://www.totoznost.blogspot.com/. In case the unauthorised using shall not be stopped within the period of 7 days from this day on, Milan Kundera will have no option then to enforce his claims by the judicial way.

Yours faithfully,
doc. JUDr. [private],
General Manager of DILIA, theatre and literary agency

email:[private]@dilia.cz

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: Why does a web host or blogging service provider get DMCA takedown notices?

Answer: Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(c)m a safe-harbor for hosts of "Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users." This safe harbors give providers immunity from liability for users' possible copyright infringement -- if they "expeditiously" remove material when they get complaints. Whether or not the provider would have been liable for infringement by materials its users post, the provider can avoid the possibility of a lawsuit for money damages by following the DMCA's takedown procedure when it gets a complaint. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous.

Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection?

Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions.

In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent's name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)]

Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].


Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)?

Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.

Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.


Question: Does a service provider have to follow the safe harbor procedures?

Answer: No. An ISP may choose not to follow the DMCA takedown process, and do without the safe harbor. If it would not be liable under pre-DMCA copyright law (for example, because it is not contributorily or vicariously liable, or because there is no underlying copyright infringement), it can still raise those same defenses if it is sued.


Question: How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?

Answer: If you believe your material was removed because of mistake or misidentification, you can file a "counter notification" asking the service provider to put it back up. Chilling Effects offers a form to build your own counter-notice.

For more information on the DMCA Safe Harbors, see the FAQs on DMCA Safe Harbor. For more information on Copyright and defenses to copyright infringement, see Copyright.


Topic maintained by Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts