case: ([ Mori; ...? ])
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2008-04-07 11:56 pm

(no subject)

"Dear LiveJournal user technophile,

We have received a report, properly formatted under the provisions set forth by United States law, indicating that your entry located at http://community.livejournal.com/fandomsecrets/141092.html violates the copyright of another person. As such, we must request that you remove that entry in its entirety as soon as possible, but no later than 0:01 AM EDT, Apr 11, 2008, to avoid further action against your account.

If you feel that this report is in error and that your use of the material is allowed under copyright law, you are entitled to file a counter-notification, also under the provisions of US law; please contact us for information on how to do this. Filing a counter-notification indicates that you are willing to defend yourself in a court of law against a claim of copyright infringement.

Regards,
Douglas
LiveJournal Abuse Prevention Team"


So. Thoughts? Comply Y/N? Personally I think "hey, mind removing this secret for copyright reasons?" would've worked far better, but that's just me.

ETA:

Is there any way you could tell me which is the offending picture? If it's possible to just remove the one picture (or multiple pictures) that was reported as copyright infringement instead of the whole entry, that would be great.

Thanks,
Case


ETA 2:

Dear LiveJournal user technophile,

Thank you for your inquiry. However, once a work is reported as a copyright infringement (in our case, a LiveJournal entry or comment), US federal law requires us to remove the entire work from our servers. The law does not give us the ability to allow the removal of part of a work and then declare that it is no longer in violation of another person's copyright, as it we do not have the legal authority to determine whether a violation has occurred.

Unfortunately, as a result, we have to require the elimination of the entire entry in order to ensure that we comply fully with US law.

Regards,
Douglas
LiveJournal Abuse Prevention Team


Sorry, the thing is this is a case kind of like with LJSecret (a community where mods post anonymously made and submitted secrets created by watchers of the community i.e. we don't create the images ourselves). The post in question contains a lot of images, any of which could be the one reported as infringing on copyright. I have no problems with deleting the entire post, but in order to make sure we don't do this again, we'd have to know which one was the offending image and how. Is there any way you could give me more information on that?

Thanks again,
Case

ETA3:

Dear LiveJournal user technophile,

Our privacy policy ensures that all requests made to the Abuse Team are confidential in nature. Because of this, we cannot disclose who contacted us or the content of their complaint. Please be assured that their notification was verified as complete and accurate before we took the step of contacting you.

The safest way to ensure this does not occur again in the future is to avoid copying any material which you do not have explicit written permission to copy. This includes, but is not limited to: screenshots of web pages, including the journals of other users, text or images from other web sites, and scanned images from magazines or other publications. Generally, these are all protected by copyright law, and if we receive a report that they have been copied without permission, we are required under US law to remove them from our servers as soon as possible.

Regards,
Douglas
LiveJournal Abuse Prevention Team

So I guess if anyone wants to save the epic post:



fdjhfjh

[identity profile] smashingstars.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 07:05 am (UTC)(link)
They'll shut down the community if you don't comply. LJ Abuse has been doing this for years - it's either a problem with the DMCA or with the way LJ deals with a DMCA complaint. All anyone has to do is file a DMCA complaint, and whether it's true or not, LJ will demand you take down the offending post. You can't just edit the post. Trust me on that, they make you take the entire thing down. If you don't do it by the deadline, they will shut the community down, and if you refuse to remove the post they'll never reinstate the community. If you agree to remove the post, then you have the fun of waiting for "Douglas" to set up an appointment with you so he can let you log on and delete the post. That'll take days.

Even if you file a counternotification stating you didn't violate copyright, LJ makes you take the post down for 3 days or something, just to prove you complied with the DMCA. It's all to legally cover their butts.

Jerks on LJ have been using DMCA complaints to get posts taken down for a long time. I recall reading people using it against bloggers and other websites, too, but I think LJ has had the most draconian approach to "complying" with the DMCA. Good luck.

[identity profile] amanuensis1.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 10:41 am (UTC)(link)
[livejournal.com profile] smashingstars has said it even more vehemently and descriptively than I have (below).

(no subject)

[identity profile] lady-ganesh.livejournal.com - 2008-04-08 15:01 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] saave.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 07:08 am (UTC)(link)
Um, wow. You'd have to be some sort of douche to report fandomsecrets. :/

Seriously not cool. So it still doesn't specify which secret was the one reported?

[identity profile] strandedthought.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 07:40 am (UTC)(link)
Wow, this is probably the most epic wank f!s has ever seen.

ps- too big #3, lol, lj doesn't want anyone to know they profit off of fanfiction and fanartz.

LJ IN LOLCAT FORM

[identity profile] rationelle.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 08:02 am (UTC)(link)
Image

[identity profile] lysambre.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 08:57 am (UTC)(link)
So many secrets violates copyright that it's almost funny it's the first time someone reported it ;).

In any case, once they tell you which secret it is I would advice to take it of, no reason to piss them off for a few pictures :)

[identity profile] amanuensis1.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 10:36 am (UTC)(link)
LJ has the power to delete the comm for non-compliance (and all the comms that are registered to the mods emails, too, and ban those emails from creating new accounts), so, if you don't want a fight, delete the entry. If you wish to ask them which image it is so that you may delete the image, go ahead, but I don't know how compliant they are about narrowing things down like that. If you believe the image in question is one which does not violate copyright and you have a legal case, you can fight it, but--I'm not making this up--you're likely to need legal assistance. Is it worth it? I suspect nearly every picture on this comm is a copyrighted image and you may be in a tough position. Very few people would blame you for just deleting the entry, and those who would blame you a) have no idea what effort it would be to fight or b) have unrealistic expectations of how much everyone should fight. LJ is a business; it is not particularly interested in free speech or fair use or what have you. It just doesn't want trouble, and will not hesitate to delete potential sources of trouble.

[identity profile] troubleinchina.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 10:55 am (UTC)(link)
If you comply with a copyright takedown notice, they will assume you are agreeing that you have violated copyright.

If you do it three times, they will suspend the journal, because you are a repeat offender. See here (http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_lounge/695614.html?thread=16687678#t16687678).

[identity profile] yaseanne.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 10:58 am (UTC)(link)
Well, there aren't even many secrets with explicity depicted/named fandoms in that post. Even less that actually voice a negative opinion (no one would be so crazy as to force you to take down praise, right?).

Btw, doesn't this fall under "fair use"/"parody"?

4, 11, 13, 14, 15, 62, 76...

[identity profile] yaseanne.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 11:03 am (UTC)(link)
... are the suspects. ;)

[identity profile] partly-bouncy.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 11:57 am (UTC)(link)
Comply. Meyshi incident (http://www.fanhistory.com/index.php/Meyshi) seems to teach that compliance will generally result in the material being reinstated if you follow LiveJournal's rules for how to handle it. File a counter notification if you think you have a case or if you don't think they'll sue.

(And then, uh, add the details to the Fan History article about fandomsecrets (http://www.fanhistory.com/index.php/Fandomsecrets) so people know what happened.)
fangirlism: (Default)

[personal profile] fangirlism 2008-04-09 09:56 pm (UTC)(link)
Whoa that Meyshi chick is insane

(Anonymous) 2008-04-08 01:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Fuck Livejournal. Move fandomsecrets to Insanejournal.

(Anonymous) 2008-04-08 01:12 pm (UTC)(link)
IAWTC

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2008-04-08 13:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2008-04-08 13:54 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2008-04-08 13:34 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] xenoglossy - 2008-04-08 17:55 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] finmagik.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 01:15 pm (UTC)(link)
That's just fucked up.

(Anonymous) 2008-04-08 01:16 pm (UTC)(link)
Love how ppl are bargaining "let's delete the old ones, who cares! no one reads them anyway" /:|

slippery slope

Comply.

[identity profile] lady-laguna.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 01:37 pm (UTC)(link)
It'd be nice if they told you which secret violated copyright, however. Some companies are like bulldogs about this stuff. Archie, for instance, is very protective of their properties and don't even appreciate homages.

"Fair Use" is pretty fuzzy in this instance, and I wouldn't try to stand behind it. I do believe [livejournal.com profile] improved_archie tried to justify their material that way. And now they're gone. :/

Re: Comply.

[identity profile] powercorrupts.livejournal.com 2008-04-10 02:27 am (UTC)(link)
"Fair Use" isn't really a specific denomination, though. You can't say 100% for a fact that almost anything is going to quality, because it's a case-by-case thing. Unless you're working with a non-profit educational thing that's only using a tiny part, it's just not safe to assume that you'll get by on fair use if it gets taken to court. For that reason, LJ wants their asses out of the fire, and likely won't consider anything fair use just in case. DCMA can get the site in a lot of trouble too, so LJ isn't going to accept something that has a only okay chance of standing up in court.

Re: Comply.

[identity profile] lady-laguna.livejournal.com - 2008-04-10 04:04 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] san-toki.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 01:50 pm (UTC)(link)
Comply. Unfortunately, livejournal in your TOS that you signed and agreed to when you signed up has a lot of power over what goes on to your account. After you comply maybe ask what caused the violation- probably some disgruntled jackass decided to report a violation. In the future, if every other post gets hit with a violation, would it be even worth it to have a community like this?

In the "About Livejournal"

Core Values

We believe in self-expression, and we provide tools that you can use to communicate with others in immediate and in creative ways. We believe in letting you create your own content and to choose how to express yourself, your thoughts, and your feelings.

We believe in diversity, and we welcome and respect different opinions, different cultures, and different perspectives. LiveJournal brings people of various backgrounds together. We strongly support freedom of expression, and we're committed to helping you share your diversity with others.

We believe in creativity, and we encourage you to use the features that LiveJournal offers to share the process of creating content with your friends. Whether it's in the form of writing, making userpics, or designing layouts, everyone has something to offer. We want to make it easy for you to share that with the world.

We believe in community, and we know that LiveJournal thrives because of its loyal users. We're committed to incorporating your feedback into our product and technical decisions. We partner and collaborate with the community in order to improve the service for everyone -- from the novice to the expert, and everyone in between.

We believe in privacy, and we make sure to safeguard your innermost thoughts. We provide you with the tools to choose who to share your content with, and we respect the decisions you make. We let you decide how you want to protect your privacy, and we work to build a service that you trust.

[identity profile] audreym.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 01:56 pm (UTC)(link)
I'd say remove the offending pictures, not worth fighting.

Wonder which secrets violated copyright and how?

And don't stop doing this community here at LJ. I love reading all the secrets, and it's alot of fun and amusing.
Edited 2008-04-08 13:59 (UTC)

(Anonymous) 2008-04-08 02:29 pm (UTC)(link)
best is to delete the one/few pics. if not, better comply...

[identity profile] nochi_san.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:09 pm (UTC)(link)
Rather than a fanart secret like everyone is saying, I think it's more likely that it's a webcomic. Fanart can't be copyrighted by the artist, because the subject matter is copyrighted by someone else. Webcomics are original creations (most of the time).

Any Striptease secrets lately? I remember the artist getting butthurt over his character bios being used on Wiki, maybe it's the same sort of thing...

[identity profile] kidalana.livejournal.com 2008-04-10 03:14 am (UTC)(link)
I've seen fanart people file copyright infringement stuff against others who take their work plenty of times. >.>
(Or at least they seriously threaten)

[identity profile] averysmallthing.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:11 pm (UTC)(link)
A secreter may have gotten pissed about his/her secret being used in another secret. Though the maker of the original secret would not hold the copyright on any already copyrighted material in the secret (and is in fact in violation his/herself for using copyrighted material), the secret maker holds the copyright to any new material (such as the text of the secret). Original secret maker may have gotten pissed if his/her secret was reused in another secret and is throwing a hissy.

Whether or not the secret maker's copyright is enforceable is another matter, as he/she may already be in violation of copyright. LJ won't care if it's enforceable or not, though, because since it's on their servers, they're liable. They just want it off.

Of course, it may be a legit copyright holder, but as others have said, I don't see what would make that entry special.

[identity profile] myaurasmiles.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:13 pm (UTC)(link)
It's the same form letter they send to everyone. It's not supposed to be friendly, because it's a legal form letter. Why wouldn't you comply, though? It seems like not complying would just get your account in trouble and it's probably not worth it.

[identity profile] julian-black.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:35 pm (UTC)(link)
My guess? There's a butthurt fanartist involved. Which would make whining about copyright violation ironic and hilarious (and more than a little pathetic).

Given LJ's level of customer service, I rather doubt you'll get a reply, but yes, it would be nice to know.

[identity profile] iapetusneume.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:40 pm (UTC)(link)
If you don't get a reply, just get the whole thing. But I'd save all the secrets with their numbers, and would try asking again after the post was deleted which one was a violation. You could mention that you'll modify your rules so it doesn't happen again (as I know you will most likely do).
ext_141: (Default)

[identity profile] emmuzka.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 04:31 pm (UTC)(link)
What a way to get offended. Um, in lj, does anyone than the actual copyright holder report a violation? Do they check it?

I'll say delete the entry, at least this time. No need to shoot oneself in the foot because of this. If there will be systematical reporting, then it's another issue.

[identity profile] xanykaos.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 05:08 pm (UTC)(link)
Since we're just a for-fun type of community here, I'd say comply. I'd wait on it to see if they say which one it was, but if they don't say by the deadline, just nix the post, I guess. It's a shame, but it's better than getting shut down for a really stupid reason.

I need my fix.

[identity profile] miss_prince.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 05:46 pm (UTC)(link)
People seem to be saying the whole thing will have to be taken down anyway? Is that right?

It might work to go into "edit" and copy-paste the post into a text file, then delete the entry, ask which secret was the problem, remove it from the post, and re-post.

Dunno if it's worth the hassle, though.

[identity profile] thememusicc.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 06:15 pm (UTC)(link)
That's from like a month ago, anyone concerned with the secret in question has replied to it and moved on. It's not like they're asking you to shut the whole shebang down.

Right?

Page 4 of 6