Mesotheliomaweb text metastasizing? (2) -- Chilling Effects Clearinghouse

Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Safe Harbor > Notices > Mesotheliomaweb text metastasizing? (2) (NoticeID 2234, http://chillingeffects.org/N/2234)

Mesotheliomaweb text metastasizing? (2)

July 31, 2005

Sender Information:
Daniel Crean
Sent by: [Private]
[Private]
Austin, TX, 78746, US

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

Sent via: fax
Re: Attn: AdSense Support, DMCA Complaint

Sir/Madam:

I write to complain about an AdSense publisher who has copied a website from one of my clients.

1. The copyrighted work at issue is text and design that appears on the website Mesotheliomaweb.org on the pages http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/symptoms.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/diagnosis.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/doctor patient.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/treat.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/palliativecare.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/pain.htm
http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/newapproaches.htm

2. The page that infringes is http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/

3. My name is Daniel Crean. My e mail address is [private]@sitecoach.com.

4. According to whois information at the registrar whois.markmonitor.com, the contact information for this domain is

Google Inc.
(DOM 345046)
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View
CA
94043 US

Domain Name: blogspot.com

Administrative Contact:
DNS Admin
(NIC 1467103)
Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View
CA
94043 US
dns admin@google.com +1.6502530000 Fax +1.6506188571

5. I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above on the allegedly infringing web pages is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

6. I swear, under penalty of perjury consistent with United States Code Title 17, Section 512, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

Sincerely,

[signature]

Daniel J. Crean

Fax: 08/08/2005

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-pain-and-pain-management.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/pain.htm

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/new-mesothelioma-treatment-approaches.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/newapproaches.htm

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-palliative-care.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/palliativecare.htm

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-treatment-options.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/treat.htm#traditional

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-treatment-options-time.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/treat.htm

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-diagnosis-questions.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/doctor-patient.htm

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-diagnosis.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/diagnosis.htm

Thanks.

Daniel Crean

At 01:44 PM 8/5/2005, you wrote:
>Hello Daniel,
>
>We've received your copyright complaint regarding
>drugsrecalled.blogspot.com dated 7/31/05. We'll be happy to assist in
>processing your request. However, we will need some additional information
>on the allegedly infringing content on the blog in question.
>
>In regard to the material that is being infringed upon, we will need to
>know the specific content on drugsrecalled.blogspot.com that you claim is
>infringing upon the copyrighted work on pages of mesotheliomaweb.org .
>Please identify each post by permalink or date that allegedly contains
>infringing material. Note that the permalink of a post is usually found by
>clicking on the timestamp of the post.
>
>Thank you for your patience. Please let us know if you have any questions.
>
>Sincerely,
>Blogger Support

08/08/2005 13 34 FAX 650 623 6721

From: Dan Crean [private]@sitecoach.com
To: "Blogger Support" [private]@google.com
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 14:33 :34 0500
Local. Fri Aug 5 2005 12:33 pm
Subject: [4259154] RE: DMCA complaint

Also, one more thing in addition to the e-mail I just sent:

http://drugsrecalled.blogspot.com/2005/01/mesothelioma-common-questions.html

is a copy of http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/mesothelioma.htm

image

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 Chilling Effects

Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org

disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts