Hacker News Reader

Isn’t there a contradiction—if as you say DMCA perjury cases aren’t prosecuted, what’s there to lose for that hypothetical “DMCA troll” LLC?

View on HN

DMCA perjury requires "knowingly" sending false reports. So far there's enough deniability for bigcos to get away with it.

This hypothetical troll wouldn't have that deniability. It would be very clear that they are knowingly making false complaints.

“Hello, I get paid tens of thousands of dollars per year to oversee DMCA reporting with innumerable false positives without reviewing whether or not short clips of content with commentary around it is fair use.”

There’s enough deniability for prosecutors to not care, but there’s also enough evidence that prosecutors could politely inform them that there is a pattern of misconduct.

I think the parent may just be suggesting that there's no need for the LLC wrapper, because it wouldn't hypothetically provide protection anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com