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 > Bear release photos released too far, photog complains Printer-friendly version

Bear release photos released too far, photog complains

June 18, 2008

 

Sender Information:
[Individual]
Sent by: [Private]
[Private]

Recipient Information:
[Private]
Digg, Inc.
San Francisco, CA, 94017, USA


Sent via: email
Re: Re: Your request dated April 28, 2008

Dear Digg Community Support:

Here is the revised letter with the correct URL from which I request
that my photo be removed. Thank you!

Richard

Digg, Inc.
[private]
3rd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94107

Dear Digg, Inc:

1. [Private], [private], Marquette, MI 49855. Email address
is [private]@chartermi.net .

2. One image each from a sequence if images that shows a grizzly bear
being released from a trap and then attacking the game warden who
released it are posted at the following URLs:
http://digg.com/pets_animals/How_NOT_To_Release_a_Bear_Into_the_Wild_PICS, http://digg.com/pets_animals/How_not_to_release_a_bear,
http://digg.com/people/Bear_Release_Gone-Bad and http://digg.compets_animals/Bear_Release_Doesn_t_Go_as_Planned.

3. A sequence of images of a grizzly bear being released from a trap
in the back of a pickup truck by a game warden standing on top of the
trap. The bear turns on the warden after out of the trap. The final
image in the sequence shows the game warden with a pant leg up and
blood visible where the grizzly bear bit him.

4. I have a good faith belief that there is no legal basis for use of
these copyrighted images on these sites.

5. I swear, under the penalty of perjury, that the information in this
notification is accurate and I am the owner of the copyright to the
above mentioned images.

6. If you need any additional information that is not included in this
notification, please inform me what it is. Thank you!


Sincerely,
[private]

 
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