As it is right now, you can earn lots of money by DMCA:ing popular creators, monetize on their content for a while (or a long time if they don't have a friend at Google who can escalate the issue).
Doesn't that mean that the whole justice system in US is broken? Courts of law exist for this very purpose, so that every citizen can fight for their rights, including defending themselves against this type of extortion. If the cost of lawsuit is prohibitive then you might as well live in some third world dictatorship, with no justice system at all.
Plea bargains. That is all.
Mirimax subcontracted to a fly by night organization that sent 10,000 bogus takedown requests? Great. The damages are 10% of revenue. Since Disney is the parent, that would include Disney theme park tickets, cruise ships, the entire Star Wars franchise, etc.
A 1% revenue hit per 1000 take downs seems completely proportional to me. To go after trolls with no revenue, add in a fine for 10x whatever ad revenue they raked in by camping on the disputed rights.
To make sure these get litigated, make sure the damages go to the victim and their lawyers (not google, etc), and also tack on legal fees.
The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.
From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Rest...
The current system is why PG&E has literally blown up neighborhoods and burnt down a city, but the investors only got a slap on the wrist.
In a system where punitive damages are a percentage of the valuation of the corporate entity that committed the crime, repeatedly breaking the law would force massive issuances of equity to the victims. For particularly lawless companies, this would mean the current owners equity would be diluted to the point where they would cede control of the company to the wronged parties.
To pick a different industry, this means that ownership of most coal mines would have been transferred to the miners and surrounding towns years ago (unless they stopped flouting safety and environmental regulations).
For each case of copyfraud, have the defrauder lose copyright for one item in their catalogue and placed into public domain. The item? Victim's choice.
This is such a strange comment to me. "Investors" use electricity, live in neighborhoods in California, etc. Why would they want to destroy that stuff? Or are you saying that investors that live far away and have a fraction of a percent of their money invested in PG&E through a mutual fund have the desire or the ability to cause PG&E to do bad things? Assuming they do, how do you envision a diversified investor be punished, even if you took away the whole thing?
http://www.burnfoundation.org/programs/resource.cfm?c=1&a=3
> Hot Water Causes Third Degree Burns… …in 1 second at 156º …in 2 seconds at 149º …in 5 seconds at 140º …in 15 seconds at 133º.
I mean, I have spilled boiling water on myself occasionally and I don't think I got third degree burns.
Although maybe I'm just comfortably numb.
Third degree burns happen with boiling hot water, any boiling water is dangerous and potentially lethal if mishandled. People underestimate the energy stored in that water.
AFAIK DMCA notices only produce a takedown, not monetization. If you want to monetize you go through Content ID, which is not the DMCA.
A false DMCA also exposes you to real legal threat, and a big player with money for a lawyer will dismantle you.
I've heard from YouTubers that when they win the appeal they get the monetization that was taken returned back to them. This does not apply when the video was completely demonetized though, only when the monetization was reassigned.
edit:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7000961?hl=en
Throughout the dispute process, we'll hold the revenue separately and, once the dispute is resolved, we'll pay it out to the appropriate party.