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).

[identity profile] lady-ganesh.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 03:01 pm (UTC)(link)
The problem is the DCMA more than LJ. It's a terrible law.