1 year, 9 months ago
via ask.inc.com
Is DMCA actually effective?
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which was passed in 1998, states that an Internet Service Provider (ISP) can not be held liable for the copyright and trademark violations of their clients. However, the ISP is supposed to act on DMCA violation claims in a timely manner when a copyright holder files a complaint. Does this act actually deter people from ripping music, image and video files and passing them through countless ISPs?
videos:
Separate topics with commas, or by pressing return. Use the delete or backspace key to edit or remove existing topics.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$1 Answer
While I am not completely convinced that the DMCA will deter people in general from pirating copyrighted content, I do believe that it does a lot of good. Having worked at a company that was often sent take-down notices for user-submitted content in violation of copyright, the act set up a clear-cut process for how such matters should be handled. Similarly, it defined who is at fault in these situations, being the user rather than the ISP or in the case I mentioned earlier, the website that allowed user submissions. It pretty much made it clear that copyright holders can go after the users, who ultimately made the decision to violate the copyright.
If I remember correctly, Viacom attempted to challenge the law regarding YouTube and how Google policed copyrighted content submitted by users. Viacom claimed Google should have been taking the initiative to police the content themselves, where as under the law, Google was only required to take down material when a claim was submitted (which they did). The judge ruled in favor of Google, which in my opinion is the right call.
While it may not stop people from violating copyright in the virtual world, it does clear up a lot of the loose ends on how companies can go after those who break the rules and protects companies that are often unaware third parties to the crime.
If I remember correctly, Viacom attempted to challenge the law regarding YouTube and how Google policed copyrighted content submitted by users. Viacom claimed Google should have been taking the initiative to police the content themselves, where as under the law, Google was only required to take down material when a claim was submitted (which they did). The judge ruled in favor of Google, which in my opinion is the right call.
While it may not stop people from violating copyright in the virtual world, it does clear up a lot of the loose ends on how companies can go after those who break the rules and protects companies that are often unaware third parties to the crime.
images:
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Report Abuse
