Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Dane
So, those 37% are nothing but notices that are outside US jurisdiction and not directly subject to DMCA. But that doesn't mean they are not still valid "at all" in terms of general copyright claims and it certainly does not back up what is suggested here.
|
total lie
http://static.chillingeffects.org/Ur...12-summary.pdf
here is the exact article referenced
Quote:
Thirty percent of notices demanded takedown for claims that presented an
obvious question for a court (a clear fair use argument, complaints about
uncopyrightable material, and the like)
|
the reference to 37% being outside the united states was
in addition to the already establish 37% bogus
Quote:
In addition, we found some interesting patterns that do not, by themselves, indicate concern, but which are of concern when combined with the fact that one third of the notices depended on questionable claims:
ƒ Over half?57%?of notices sent to Google to demand removal of links in the
index were sent by businesses targeting apparent competitors;
ƒ Over a third?37%?of the notices sent to Google targeted sites apparently
outside the United States.
The specifics of our data set may limit the ability to neatly generalize our findings. Yet
the findings are troubling, and seem to indicate a need to further study, and perhaps
revisit entirely, the DMCA takedown process.
|
oh and that 37% doesn't include the 1/11 which are technically invalid because they had statutory flaws.
Quote:
One out of 11 included significant statutory flaws that render the notice unusable
(for example, failing to adequately identify infringing material).
|