Filing Lawsuits Against Those Who File False DMCA Complaints

by admin on June 21st, 2010

filed under People




This is a video response to Thinking of filing a false DMCA claim by dprjones www.youtube.com www.copyright.gov The DMCA complaint sent to Youtube must contain: (i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. (f) Misrepresentations. – Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section (1) that material or activity is infringing shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer. . . ————————————— Under certain rare circumstances you may be able to file a lawsuit anonymously. So says the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: www.internetdefamationlawblog.com Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant #1, 06-1590-cv (2nd Cir. 2008) the Court found that a plaintiff may only sue anonymously if his need for anonymity outweighs both the prejudice to the opposing party and the publics interest in knowing the plaintiffs identity. It seems to me that you shouldnt have to give up your right to anonymity in Court in order to defend your right to speak anonymously on the internet. This is still unsettled law. I dont know whether a Court would rule that a YouTuber who has

Posted by Ashley

25 Responses to “Filing Lawsuits Against Those Who File False DMCA Complaints”

  1. DebateFaith says:

    Im having a problem with the false flagging pastor davie from amarillo, he took down 6 vids on 2 diferent channels, 2 he false DMCAd, lets say he’s on borrowed time
    This channel (DEBATEFAITH) is most likely going to be flagged to death soon, so EVERYONE try and MIRROR all the vids relevant to pastor davie if you can
    thanks

  2. themaskedanalyst says:

    That’s good to know. Glad I could help.

  3. NYTNinAmerica says:

    I just got suspended Friday (‘NotYourTypicalNegro’). Your videos were very helpful in letting me know what to do.

    Thanks.

  4. checkthisout000 says:

    It wasn’t removed, I have the choice to either remove it, leave it without audio, or fight it back. It was with that “Electronic fingerpring ID” thing saying it matched third party stuff.

  5. themaskedanalyst says:

    How was it removed?
    Was your video removed because of a DMCA or because it matched the soundtrack of a file in YouTube’s electronic fingerprint identification system?

  6. checkthisout000 says:

    Yeah, I had a question about fair use…I used about 30 seconds of a song to give the credits some feeling, and it got silenced, what should I do?

  7. Paxmax says:

    great vid TMA!

  8. BKLiar says:

    StraightD0pe had PMs from Brett Keane that seemed like Keane really was behind the DMCA’s, I’m sure it’s in one of his mirrored videos.

  9. kevjumbacockhead says:

    gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp fag

  10. kevjumbacockhead says:

    gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp *** gimp fag

  11. kevjumbacockhead says:

    you look like a gimp ****** ***! LOL! you fail at making videos and why do you hide your fucking face you weirdo! lol im gonna spam your channel *****!

  12. ladyabaxa says:

    I’m interested in hearing more about this case. My point is that Brett has acknowledged that the activity is ongoing and yet does nothing when it is well within his powers to do so. I am curious because there’s a world of difference between libel law and copyright law. For example he may be found liable by another copyright holder other then the video makers if there was material used with permission that was DMCAed without their consent.

  13. themaskedanalyst says:

    Thank you very much, jakebreaker. Your comment made my day.

  14. jakebreaker says:

    Mr. Analyst, you’ve been chewing-up and spitting-out people for a good, long while. It’s an honor to continue to subscribe to your videos.

  15. wolfeedarkfang says:

    I have to say this was very good. :D

    I wish that if someone was to file a DMCA they would be obligated to give their contact info to the uploader of the video. I’m sure those people don’t wish to give up their anonymity unless it was a serious matter. Sadly we have this big hole in youtube’s system though.

  16. comface says:

    What can I say? It’s the way I roll.

  17. tersse says:

    analyst it was just a off the cuff comment i like your stuff, just trying to remind ppl its not all clear cut and there is lots of other **** we need to deal with, thats why i propose we just get rid of the flag it dosnt make any sence or have much use now.

  18. themaskedanalyst says:

    I am no expert on questions of jurisdiction. You will have to speak to a lawyer who specializes in internet law for that answer.

  19. themaskedanalyst says:

    Not only did this get laughed out of court, the lawyer who filed the claim was sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

    You have NO legal obligation to ensure that others aren’t committing crimes while falsely using your name.

    On the other hand, if it can be shown that the real Brett Keane is working in collusion with someone else who is using Brett Keane’s name to silence others… well, that’s a different story.

  20. themaskedanalyst says:

    Sorry ladyabaxa. Though he has a MORAL obligation to tell YouTube that he is not behind the DMCAs, he has no legal obligation to do so. Long story that I don’t want to go into here, but I am VERY familiar with a similar case where some troll was using the name of a famous newscaster in order to post libelous statements on a message board. The person who was libeled sued the famous newscaster under this theory.

  21. Clausfarre says:

    Kinky and righteous.

  22. tersse says:

    what if i, in the uk wahtnt to complain, were do i go american court or UK court?

  23. ladyabaxa says:

    It’s highly likely he is lying. If someone is filing DMCA’s under his name that is illegal and he can be held liable for being an accessory to the commission of a crime as he does nothing to file counterclaims to clear up the problem.

  24. fiusux12 says:

    You always have interesting information. I enjoy learning from your hard work. Great Vid!

  25. bamboo4tameshigiri says:

    Emails from BKs current account (at the time) were sent to StraightD0pe GLOATING. This anon “person” would have had to have hacked BK’s account AS WELL AS file the DMCAs.

Leave a Reply