What you posted there regards contract terms between the artist and
Youtube. That's between them to fight out. If they don't like Youtube's
terms, they can take their stuff elsewhere.

DMCA safe harbor has nothing to do with contracts. It means that, if you
run an interactive web site (essentially, anything where users are allowed
to post stuff), you can't be held liable if one of your users posts
copyrighted material. The user still can be, but you, as the site operator,
cannot.

In exchange, you must provide a way that a copyright holder can contact
you, using a standard method, and tell you that they've found material that
infringes their copyright. You must then take that material down (within a
certain period, I think ten days) and provide notice to the user that
you've done so. The user can then either file a "counter notice" if they
believe the material is not infringing, which you'd send back to the
copyright holder if they choose to do so, or drop it, in which case the
material stays gone. If a counter notice is filed, the copyright holder can
at that time either take the matter up in court directly with the user, or
drop it. If they don't file in court after a counter notice, you can
automatically reinstate the material after a certain period of time. If the
DMCA notice was malicious or fraudulent, the safe harbor provision also
establishes liability against the person or entity who filed it. But as
long as you file those procedures, you, as the site operator, are immune
from liability for either the material being present to start with or for
it being taken down.

Without that protection, no one in their right mind would operate an
interactive web site, at least not in the US. It protects everything from
classic car hobbyist forums operated by a few people at their own cost, to
sites like Youtube and Facebook. None of those would be possible without
it. Or, at the very least, they would have to be operated from countries
which are, shall we say, much more lax on copyright enforcement. That's bad
for everyone, including the copyright holders--they no longer would have an
effective method of getting infringements taken down.

Since Wikimedia is DMCA-compliant, that means that, say, AP or Getty can't
sue Wikimedia if a user uploads a bunch of their images to Commons. They
would have to find and sue that user. And of course, they could file DMCA
requests to have their stuff removed. But since WMF is much easier to find
and has much deeper pockets, if they had the option of suing WMF, I
guarantee you that they would. The only thing that stops them from that is
safe harbor.

That, and Section 230 of the CDA (which excludes liability from site
operators for other types of illegal conduct like threats) are, without
exaggeration, the very reason that interactive web services can exist at
all. Without those, you'd be accepting liability for anything a user of
your site might choose to do. You'd have to be insane to do that.

Todd

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Lilburne <lilbu...@tygers-of-wrath.net>
wrote:

> On 19/12/2016 16:45, David Gerard wrote:
>
>> For various reasons * I follow music industry news. One drum the record
>> industry has been beating *hard* in the past year is attempts to reduce
>> the
>> DMCA "safe harbor" provisions in order to squeeze more money from YouTube.
>> It's been a running theme through 2016.
>>
>>
> Oh dear! If this gets traction poor little Google, won't be able to run
> their protection racket any longer. It is so worrying that a little cellist
> might bring a $400 billion company to its knees.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/27/zoe-keati
> ng-youtube-google-music
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to