| |||||||||||||||||||||
| Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Safe Harbor > Notices > Posting Correspondence on Usenet Generates 512 Notices (NoticeID 2447, http://chillingeffects.org/N/2447) | Location: https://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=2447 |
August 30, 2005
|
Sender Information: |
Recipient Information:
[Private]
Google, Inc.
Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA
Sent via: fax
Re: DMCA Notice of Copyright Infringement
I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above on the allegedly infringing webpages is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. 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. The following is a DMCA complaint for infringing my copyrighted material. All material must be removed. Failure to remove the material will result in a lawsuit. This complaint may not be copied or published except on the express terms conditioned by the author. The following links on Google Groups are presently violating Copyright provisions. Google must remove all links that appear at the bottom of the Google Groups pages when you do a search for the name "[private]" "[private]" or "[private]" or "[private]" that result in the following link at the bottom of the search result page, to a DMCA complaint filed on November 19, 2003. The reason why Google must remove this link is because the link contains Copyrighted materials on the complaint that were not expressly authorized for reproduction and are effectively reposting what was taken down from Google Groups. Google may replace that link with a link to this complaint, only provided that Chilling Effects does not link the two complaints to each other. All references to first and last name and first and last initials must be removed from the complaint, as well as address information. The link is as follows: Every such link which is found at the bottom of any search in Google Groups for the name "Philip Bartlett" or any of its variants must be removed, since it links to copyrighted and protected material. Also, the following messages, as identified by their message ID below, must be removed from Google Groups: 3B6F7360.443C9F24@mindless.com Z_W_e.8510$wg7.5421@fe06.lga
Signed [Signature]
In response to a legal complaint we received, we have removed one or more messages. If you wish, you may read the legal complaint.
87bumtgjo2j0kdpjupq7am8rcb8laf9m3i@4ax.com
010101c0e96e$333416e0$74910d0c@default
wfdX6.12470$pb1.457234@www.newsranger.com
czvw4.14204$wk.1181010@news1.mia
7041FE4B.7B7C11D9.3B869809@netscape.net
3s6D6.41258$J%5.13400678@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com
3ADD8A7F.BA06F3CA@net66.com
DVNC6.31170$J%5.10722021@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com
iAd66.1734$Ar6.550347@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net
39039D95.31C71170@bluegrass.net
1125939230.200069.243380@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
3o3f5kF43176U1@individual.net
1127956880.815666.154420@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956880.016812.154310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956880.815666.154420@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
m8hmIlts7jen8lj215reqmfm4pliraqvvv@4ax.com
5uimj19kh22g0bae6p23hla2co1ff7b9a2@4ax.com
3q14jqFcqpfeU1@individual.net
PQJ_e.1361$cF6.307@newssvr3O.news.prodigy.com
11280101.792531 23.16680 @ g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
433c607d$0$25604$e4fe5l4c@dreader16.news.xs4all.nl
Xns96E0B5265352891563@127.0.0.1
1128009103.378788.250080@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
6kW_e.10726$kH3.3585@trnddc01
1128009485.613665.130690@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1128045195540612.225990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
1119404438.341096.309940@a47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1119405441.463906.237150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
080dnfUFbpu2WyXfRVn-oA@pcisys.net
d9beki$dha$1@ruby.cit.cornell.edu
3htlffFinu80Ul @individual.net
sLidnRQdTKsd7STfRVn-oQ@pcisys.net
Xns967D7AD9F847Axxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@68.1.17.6
42B9EB4B.C2989022@netscape.net
1119404264.897796.293710@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1119405563.295070.208730@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1119404170.627856.170250@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
deghb112m8ug1ics4g6c5e6716g117cg4r@4ax.com
1119404748.376756.174330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1119384110.343711.173800@g49g2000cwa.gooaleqroups.com
1119383954.004070.298240@013g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1119384227.380104.210050@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956616.503785.318700@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1119381753.040313.301590@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127958068.334238.121150@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1127957922.861339.246260@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
r6J_e.171049$084.70410@attbi_s22
1127972638.188689.274710 @ zl4g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
1vX_e.116612$x16.112864@tornado.tampabay.rr.com
1128075883.078601.240960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956526.996078.119680@gl4g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956550.045156.125060@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1127956827.259776.322840@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
|
Question: What is copyright infringement? Are there any defenses? Answer: Infringement occurs whenever someone who is not the copyright holder (or a licensee of the copyright holder) exercises one of the exclusive rights listed above. The most common defense to an infringement claim is "fair use," a doctrine that allows people to use copyrighted material without permission in certain situations, such as quotations in a book review. To evaluate fair use of copyrighted material, the courts consider four factors:
The most significant factor in this analysis is the fourth, effect on the market. If a copier's use supplants demand for the original work, then it will be very difficult for him or her to claim fair use. On the other hand, if the use does not compete with the original, for example because it is a parody, criticism, or news report, it is more likely to be permitted as "fair use." Trademarks are generally subject to fair use in two situations: First, advertisers and other speakers are allowed to use a competitor's trademark when referring to that competitor's product ("nominative use"). Second, the law protects "fair comment," for instance, in parody. 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? 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. Question: What are the counter-notice and put-back procedures?
Answer: In order to ensure that copyright owners do not wrongly insist on the removal of materials that actually do not infringe their copyrights, the safe harbor provisions require service providers to notify the subscribers if their materials have been removed and to provide them with an opportunity to send a written notice to the service provider stating that the material has been wrongly removed. [512(g)] If a subscriber provides a proper "counter-notice" claiming that the material does not infringe copyrights, the service provider must then promptly notify the claiming party of the individual's objection. [512(g)(2)] If the copyright owner does not bring a lawsuit in district court within 14 days, the service provider is then required to restore the material to its location on its network. [512(g)(2)(C)] A proper counter-notice must contain the following information:
If it is determined that the copyright holder misrepresented its claim regarding the infringing material, the copyright holder then becomes liable to the person harmed for any damages that resulted from the improper removal of the material. [512(f)] See also How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?, and the counter-notification generator. Question: What defenses are there to copyright infringement? Answer: The primary defense to copyright infringement is "fair use." 17 U.S.C. Question: What are the notice and takedown procedures for web sites?
Answer: In order to have an allegedly infringing web site removed from a service provider's network, or to have access to an allegedly infringing website disabled, the copyright owner must provide notice to the service provider with the following information:
Once notice is given to the service provider, or in circumstances where the service provider discovers the infringing material itself, it is required to expeditiously remove, or disable access to, the material. The safe harbor provisions do not require the service provider to notify the individual responsible for the allegedly infringing material before it has been removed, but they do require notification after the material is removed. Question: What are the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions?
Answer: In 1998, Congress passed the On-Line Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) in an effort to protect service providers on the Internet from liability for the activities of its users. Codified as section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), this new law exempts on-line service providers that meet the criteria set forth in the safe harbor provisions from claims of copyright infringement made against them that result from the conduct of their customers. These safe harbor provisions are designed to shelter service providers from the infringing activities of their customers. If a service provider qualifies for the safe harbor exemption, only the individual infringing customer are liable for monetary damages; the service provider's network through which they engaged in the alleged activities is not liable. Question: What kinds of things are copyrightable? Answer: In order for material to be copyrightable, it must be original and must be in a fixed medium. Only material that originated with the author can support a copyright. Items from the public domain which appear in a work, as well as work borrowed from others, cannot be the subject of an infringement claim. Also, certain stock material might not be copyrightable, such as footage that indicates a location like the standard shots of San Francisco in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Also exempted are stock characters like the noisy punk rocker who gets the Vulcan death grip in Star Trek IV. The requirement that works be in a fixed medium leaves out certain forms of expression, most notably choreography and oral performances such as speeches. For instance, if I perform a Klingon death wail in a local park, my performance is not copyrightable. However, if I film the performance, then the film is copyrightable. Single words and short phrases are generally not protected by copyright, even when the name has been "coined" or newly-created by the mark owner. Logos that include original design elements can be protected under copyright or under trademark. Otherwise, words, phrases and titles may be protected only by trademark, however. 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 defines a service provider under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)?
Answer: A service provider is defined as "an entity offering transmission, routing, or providing connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received" or "a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities thereof." [512(k)(1)(A-B)] This broad definition includes network services companies such as Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, bulletin board system operators, and even auction web sites. In A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster Inc., the court refused to extend the safe harbor provisions to the Napster software program and service, leaving open the question of whether peer-to-peer networks also qualify for safe harbor protection under Section 512. There are four major categories of network systems offered by service providers that qualify for protection under the safe harbor provisions:
Question: Does a copyright owner have to specify the exact materials it alleges are infringing?
Answer: Proper notice under the safe harbor provisions requires the copyright owners to specifically identify the alleged infringing materials, or if the service provider is an "information location tool" such as a search engine, to specifically identify the links to the alleged infringing materials. [512(c)(3)(iii)], [512(d)(3)]. The provisions also require the copyright owners to identify the copyrighted work, or a representative list of the copyrighted works, that is claimed to be infringed. [512(c)(3)(A)(ii)]. Rather than simply sending a letter to the service provider that claims that infringing material exists on their system, these qualifications ensure that service providers are given a reasonable amount of information to locate the infringing materials and to effectively police their networks. [512(c)(3)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(3)]. However, in the recent case of ALS Scan, Inc. v. Remarq Communities, Inc., the court found that the copyright owner did not have to point out all of the infringing material, but only substantially all of the material. The relaxation of this specificity requirement shifts the burden of identifying the material to the service provider, raising the question of the extent to which a service provider must search through its system. OSP customers should note that this situation might encourage OSP's to err on the side of removing allegedly infringing material. |
|
|