[ Edit: Also, you know how we name-and-shame Patent Trolls? This is the behavior of a Copyright Troll and we should call this behavior as such. And ultimately we need legislation against Patent Trolls and Copyright Trolls. ]
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/chris-dodd-mpaa-compe...
What do *you* have to offer?
I don't think this is a shallow or overly cynical dismissal. I think this is the core issue: this broken lobbying system, and the intellectual property industry's outstandingly effective methods for co-opting it. No one's going to solve IP laws until something changes about the fact that Disney's lawyers have more impact in government than all the rest of the democracy. The IP law problems reduce to a broader and more intractable political problem.
"A politician is talking" should also at a minimum be treated with the same skepticism as when you encounter any other form of advertising. Even assuming the person speaking is completely ethical and aligned with your specific interests, it's literally their job to convince people of things. Assuming their job is "making laws" or "governing" is a lies-to-children version, they have to get a group of people to agree on some specific set of laws or policy for any of that to happen.
Some of HN's readers are decently connected and don't have a conflict against dmca reform, but many probably are conflicted given how many startups in some way deal with IP.
I can try proposing this.
Or, or, here's an different idea. Every DMCA request gets $10K automatically put in escrow for a mandatory arbitration. If the violator is a no-show or the DMCA takedown is ruled "not frivolous" (regardless of how good it is, just not frivolous level), the money is returned to the DMCA filer. However, if the person slapped shows up and the arbitrator says "frivolous," the $10,000 is sent to the slapped person and the DMCA filer must do a full lawsuit to retrieve the $10,000 back, which will ultimately require full legal proceedings over the validity of the request. Or instead of $10K, make it $25K. If you truly believe your request is valid, what do you have to fear knowing the money will be returned?
The point is some system where the DMCA Filer must throw cash on the line from the beginning to prove good faith.
You could also make the amount required variable to company size. Small company under $1M in revenue? $500. $1-$100M? $5000. $100M+? $10000. IDK, just something.
I'd also be open to doing the same for any of the monopolistic practices of other companies that stifle small creators and engineers.
DMCA needs to go.
Who would have thought that Tom Hiddleston's Loki would have gotten so popular?
It's so powerful that you should basically doubt any Disney products grass roots popularity as it's likely the results of PR.
Those existed for ages in comic books, but I don't think mainstream / Disney would touch them.
They have a whole section on Star Wars. It has everything, except the first Star Wars?
That said, you it is very family friendly. If I had children, I might only have Disney+ on my tv.
I guess those at Disney feel their brand is so good, they let their lawyers harass people?
(When I was a kid, my dad took us to Disney Land. It was the only time I saw him enthused over anything. He was shocked at the detail, and cleanliness of the LA park. He told us the Matterhorn will be last because of the line. At 10 minutes to closing they th old us to come back tomorrow. I've been meaning to go back. I still remember my first view of the park, and it was magical.)
They have all movies, including first. I've watched it there like a month ago.
I'm against the idea of DMCA for cosplay in general... But if he knew how the rules apply before, this seems like testing the boundaries / "I'm not touching you" game. He can contest the request through the standard procedure. It would get interesting if that gets rejected.
Also should change last name to Disney.
On the contrary: filing a false DMCA takedown notice opens you up to perjury.
...even if no-one has been prosecuted yet: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/51541/has-anyone-bee...
Instead what happens is media-companies strong-arm content-hosting companies (YouTube, etc) to let them file informal takedown notices that don't open themselves up to perjury with much weaker protections for innocent people caught up in the collateral damage - what does YouTube etc get from it? I suspect it's something they agreed to do to sweeten their deal to keep Vevo and other brands' content mirrored on YouTube.
Looks like this is an actual complaint from Disney, as opposed to the proactive content removals Redbubble has been sending and was discussed a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27551372
I don't think copyright laws should be abolished, but this shit is getting ridiculous. Sending false copyright claims should be treated as a crime in it of itself. When falsely accused of a copyright claim, the recipient has to go through a process to try and get that pulled, costing time, effort and potentially money. And yet these corporations get no punishment for spamming legal threats to whatever their bots deem appropriate.
Like, I'm as much of a Disney hater as anyone, but you really should understand just how much money, time, and effort go into Disney productions. The amounts would blow your mind.
They spend a comparatively miniscule amount of money defending their intellectual property. This is what people should be up in arms about. It really shouldn't be this easy for them.
All these comments which imply Disney pursued this takedown despite consideration of competing interests like supporting fans are a bit silly. First, Disney itself isn’t likely directly involved. Second, Disney is MASSIVE. Even if one of Disney’s marketing departments opposes such notices, they likely wouldn’t even know who to call to try to stop them.
Note: I dislike takedown notices as much as the rest of you.
Should he have to appeal and enter into a legal battle with one of the most dangerous and well funded legal teams on earth? No. It sucks. But the DMCA we have now probably cannot be improved and the safe harbor provisions are vital to the freedom of the net. Any attempts to change it for the better will just make it worse.
The best thing he can do, what he's done, is try to get wider public coverage of the stupidity in the hope that disney will try to avoid controversy.
As long as IP is an accounting asset, this isn't going to stop.
