Comment by app | Hacker News Reader

Comment by app | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

"No, because by putting your content back up the host is opening themselves to liability if it turns out you are wrong. Nobody is going to do that"

No, the point of DMCA is the provider is agnostic to who owns the content. Its the making a decision on who owns the copyright that opens them up to litigation, because they would lose safe harbor protection. Incidentally, NOT putting the content back up would be a violation of the DMCA, which also opens you up to litigation.

"The person who filed the complaint is a mailinator address, or in Russia/Iran/Cuba or works for a corporation with more lawyers than you."

So they're either a 1) liar, in which case your content is back online and you're back where you started or 2) a big corp who can threaten to get their way? Welcome to the fundamental problem with the DMCA: it can be abused.

Incidentally, NOT putting the content back up would be a violation of the DMCA, which also opens you up to litigation.

I don't think the DMCA says anything about having your account canceled for causing problems, however.

("Sorry, we determined that your node was using too much CPU, and have terminated your account." Now the host does not have to deal with your DMCA problems, as they are no longer your host. They can even pull a Comcast and keep the limits unpublished and enforce them arbitrarily as they please.

The little guy never wins.)

Totally true!

Isn't that the point though? The host receives a DMCA request and take down the content, they are perfectly safe (safe harbor provision etc)

You (the author) come along and say, no it isn't illegal - please put it back up. If they put it back up don't they lose the DMCA safe protection? They are publicly siding with your claim that it's legal.

Also there is the practical point that a takedown notice simply means clicking a link on the host's site or emailing an address. Getting it back involves sworn affidavits, visits to lawyers an trying to find a human contact at the hosting company.

No, the order of operations the OP posted is correct-- restoring content removed by DMCA is the lawful response to counter notifications, specifically to discourage abuse of the DMCA: if the notifying company is serious about the takedown, they have to be willing to sue you, and the evidence has to be there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com