Copyright holders vs. Content platforms…
For some time now, content creators and major rights holders have been fighting for the current takedown system to be reviewed. They have been struggling to control massive online infringement for a nearly two decades, and now latest efforts surround a major modification to the longstanding ‘Takedown’ policies, powered by a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) loophole.
Currently, most infringing content that is ‘taken down’ almost instantly reappears, and this is why copyright owners are complaining. Despite sending millions of notices, the same content reappears, sometimes just hours after being taken down.
This kickstarted a campaign for a ‘Take Down, Stay Down’ system. This movement would prevent repeating infringers from re-uploading the same content to the same sites, and this new proposal is currently under review by the US Copyright Office.
But, The Internet Archive is completely against this proposal, saying that Notice and Staydown would be an “absolute disaster.”
The Archive says…
“Notice and Staydown has a serious First Amendment problem. The government mandating the use of technology to affirmatively take speech offline before it’s even posted, without any form of review, potentially violates free speech laws.”
The Internet Archive also states that it’s not the intermediaries’ place to implement such technology, as they ”don’t have the facts about the works, such as whether they have been licensed” or not. Adding that ”most platforms are not in a good position to be making legal judgments, and they are motivated to avoid the potential for high statutory damages.”
The Archive also brought up other points like the cost of implementing the system, the issue of fair use, and lack of transparency. But, it’s not just The Internet Archive that are against this Notice and Stay down proposal, Google is also very much against this new proposed movement as well, stating that it is “not a solution and just does not work.”
Major content platforms seem to be in agreement regarding Notice and Stay down, deeming it not viable.
But, Copyright holders are very much for ‘Notice and stay down’ as they see it as the only way to fix the outdated system.
Last month, the The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) reported 200 million links to infringing content on Google since July 2011. The BPI reported these infringing links via Google’s Notice And Take Down policy, but they were quickly replaced by other pirate links, often with the same exact links. The BPI is fighting for the ‘Notice And Stay Down’ policy as they say the current system is simply not working effectively. However, Google is heavily resistant to this move and abruptly concluded that it just ”doesn’t work.” The IFPI and The RIAA, like the BPI, has sent hundreds of millions of piracy notices to Google, but there hasn’t been any improvement to the number of infringed works online.
But, if these content platforms are stating that Notice and Stay down is not the solution, there has to be another proposal that these platforms put forward, as the number of take down requests are surging year-on-year. Platforms cannot simply silence or ignore rights holders from complaining when their content is being infringed. We know that Notice and Take down just simply isn’t working, but we need to find a solution, not ignore the problem.
It will be interesting to see what the US Copyright Office determines. There have been a few roundtables discussing these issues that copyright holders have raised, but no announced changes as of yet.
Body Slam! by Vishal Somaiya (flickr); licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC by 2.0).
I’ve felt offended for years over the way these f*cking thieves just take your old websites — completely without asking — and use them. But I’ve never done anything about it.
Until now.
I’m sending a bunch of takedowns, and I’ll encourage everybody else to do the same.
go ahead copyright troll.
Not so fast, late to the party punk spammer. I’ve been reading your snide hit comments and need to call you out for what you are a troll.
A paid troll of the anonymous variety, unless you want to challenge that with your real name.
For the rest of you who don’t by this stick and want to put a fork into this BS. http://www.EndPiracy.org.
What have you got to say about that? We’re coming for you.
“But, The Internet Archive is completely against this proposal”
What did you expect from professional thieves?
Here’s an idea:
What if these guys created their own content instead of stealing ing everybody else’s intellectual property?
I know, it isn’t easy. But still…
What if these guys created their own content instead of stealing ing everybody else’s intellectual property?
lets ask sony.
oh wait we cant. someone filed a copyright complaint against it youtube channel for sony’s own content and we can’t right now.
hahahahahaha
Web 2.0 is the biggest scam in history.
Amazingly, the world ran with open arms into a system designed to appropriate your content, trade on your privacy, create permanent dossiers and run ads against it all while controlling your online life.
Now that we’ve made these platforms the largest corporations in history, they have effectively hijacked the democratic systems to the point where they are practically above the law.
And they have re-educated a generation of what otherwise could have been rational minds into a drone of useful idiots, eager to trade it all for cheaper prices and the mirage of being a part of the “revolution”.
Great deal innit?
“Great deal innit?”
The best!
And they know they’ll lose billions — our billions — when we update the DMCA.
What evidence do you guys even have that shows the Internet Archive to be thieves? Seriously, I think you’re being desperate at this point! Sheer emotionalism in your argumentation (as shown in Charlotte’s article) is NOT going to win us fans over to your side. Please do better.
“What evidence do you guys even have that shows the Internet Archive to be thieves?”
That they — literally — STEAL your site every other week!
They never ask for permission, they just steal it!
And when the Internet Archive has stolen all your copyrighted property, including all the sites you decided you don’t want to show on the web anymore, then they ask their users to pay them for your work:
“HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE?”
$10
$25
$50
$100
$250
$1000
OTHER AMOUNT:
Pay with a credit card:
PayPal
Bitcoin
…oh, and to those who think that the Internet Archive probably gives all their millions away to charity:
Sorry, but every cent the Internet Archive and its Wayback machine make from stealing and selling your Intellectual Property goes directly to their staff of 170 professional thieves.
And these 170 thieves make more money from your work than you’ll ever do.
That’s why they think an updated DMCA would be an absolute disaster.
Yeah! Those libraries in your neighborhood are thieves too! And historians writing down all that stuff that happened as if they had a right to it!
“Those libraries in your neighborhood are thieves too!”
Eh, what? Libraries — thieves? 🙂
Libraries pay me very well for my contributions, thank you very much!
While the Internet ‘archive’ doesn’t pay me a cent. They just steal…
“And historians writing down all that stuff that happened as if they had a right to it!”
Please explain how historians are related to this, haha…
If you’re not seeing the parallel between documenting moments in time and the work of a historian then I’m not sure what to explain.
Oh and libraries pay you per use?
“If you’re not seeing the parallel between documenting moments in time and the work of a historian then I’m not sure what to explain“
But that’s just because you’re a nutcase.
“Oh and libraries pay you per use?”
First they pay per item when they buy it, then they pay royalties along the way. If an item’s popular, they buy a lot; if it’s not, they don’t. So you could say they pay per use.
The Internet Archive makes a lot of money, but it doesn’t pay the rightholders a cent.
“Notice and Staydown has a serious First Amendment problem. The government mandating the use of technology to affirmatively take speech offline before it’s even posted, without any form of review, potentially violates free speech laws.”
Anyone catch the problem(s) with the above statement?
Lets get to the first glaringly obvious error here.. you can’t “take down” something before it has been posted. There’s nothing to take down. But one could prevent the upload of material previously flagged by rights holders. Difference there.
Secondly, it is not a mandate to “use technology”. It’s a mandate to keep known infringing content from re-appearing. There is nothing stating that a platform can’t do this manually, as the majority of those issuing legitimate takedown notices have had to since the 90s.
Thirdly, there is obscurity here about what is meant by “taking speech offline”. Do they really mean “Freedom of Speech?”, or is it meant to imply that, without actually saying it?
I think they answer this question when they use the phrase “Potentially violating Free Speech laws” ie. the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference or persecution. These rights are limited and in most countries, are still subject to laws and civil consequence pertaining to libel, incitement of violence, non-disclosure agreements, perjury and of course copyright infringement, among others.
So in the case that a takedown notice would truly stifle the “public expression of an opinion” (as opposed to the simple upload of someone else’s entire album or movie), that could be a concern. But I must say that I’m at a loss to find a precedent of this versus the millions, if not already billions of legitimate takedown requests.
It’s no mystery that “take down stay down” would be an “Absolute Disaster” for the corporations and organizations built on infringing content.
And though it seems to be fashionable now, one should be careful about how they wear “Free Speech”, because it’s simply a poor wrapping for someone else’s legal property.
Yes… I saw these flaws… and a few others to boot. I sincerely appreciate your comments.
But I was honestly more focused on wondering why… after 20 YEARS, there only seems to be a handful of people in the industry who are capable of effectively debunking these arguments???? Why does the recording industry seem to be stuck in its own groundhog day where these debates are repeated endlessly? Why aren’t more musicians actively supporting the efforts to lobby for meaningful legislative changes? Why do I continue patronizing DMN when they consistently reprint both sides of the argument with a bit of innuendo added instead of articulating a clear stance based in objective facts that could actually help empower musicians to reclaim their rights?
So the Internet Archive finally declared war on art and artists.
Surprise, surprise.
But their Wayback machine is indeed a thing of the past, and you can stop it.
All these old guys could easily get away with things like the Wayback machine back in the pre-Napster days, but the times are changing. It’s no longer cool to exploit people like this.
And it’s time to fight back:
Please send them your takedown notice(s) today.
I’m not a music artist but I am a book author and a cartoonist. And yes, I will send a take down notice. But what we need to do is shut down DeviantArt for not taking down unauthorized fanart that people do not pay the creator royalty to post it.
DeviantArt was supposed be a place for original art, But now no one is going after fanart. So the takedown staydown will finally put an end to DeviantArt once and for all.
Furthermore the internet is a luxury, not a right.
Furthermore the internet is a luxury, not a right.
eh that’s not what the majority are starting to believe. but it really does not matter once you relics are gone.
But their Wayback machine is indeed a thing of the past, and you can stop it.
on the contrary boycott. you are a thing of the past. considering the younger generation has looser views on copyright then your kind and unlike your kind are not unhinged nutcases that compare things like internet streaming to the holocaust or slavery you’re living on borrowed time crazy time. you still got some fight left in you though i’m sure you will go do wild and crazy things like suing the dead and everything but overall you will soon be gone and nobody will miss you you deranged disney villain.
Since it was announced that the U.S. Congress was going to perform a formal review of our copyright laws, momentum has been building for legislators to add a ‘stay down’ amendment to Section 512 and restore an artists’ right to decide what happens to their copyrighted work. Something the author(s) of the legislation had intended when it was included in the DMCA in 1998.
As we continue to move toward the possibility of this amendment actually becoming law, powerful, well financed opponents will mount an intense, far reaching campaign in opposition. They will call ‘stay down’ censorship, an attack on free speech and fair use, technically impossible and too expensive for website operators.
I’ve heard all these arguments before, at Congressional Roundtable Hearings and most recently at the U.S. Copyright Office Hearings last May in Manhattan. I also heard at these hearings that tech and the internet had been great for the U.S. economy, so why mess with a good thing? Really, I heard that along with other statements that led me to believe that many on the opposing side had no idea how valuable creative work/content was to their businesses.
When the Congressional Copyright Review was announced in 2013 it opened a window of opportunity for desperately needed copyright reform. When the U.S. Copyright Office announced on the last day of 2015 their ‘Notice of Inquiry’ for Section 512 it confirmed how ineffective and broken our current takedown notification process is and why so many highly visible pirate websites can avoid prosecution while openly using infringing content to make money.
The only way we can make sure that ‘takedown and staydown’ has its’ day in court and is enacted into law is by showing significant public/artist support for the presumptive bill. We are going to need a huge turnout to counteract all the lobbyists roaming the halls of justice fighting for their employer’s position and rogue, anonymously financed organizations like, Fight for the Future, who will incite online mobs with incendiary half-truths and outright lies to mount last minute attacks with the intent of influencing outcomes.
We are going to need tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of musicians, songwriters, filmmakers, authors, photographers, designers and anyone whose work can be copyrighted and distributed on the internet to be visible and available supporters of a ‘staydown’ reform. Who knows when you will have this opportunity again.
If you sign the http://www.takedownstaydown.org petition you can join other working artists in showing your support for positive, meaningful change.
Great post! Agreed 100%.
But, to one of the points that was raised in another comment.. I really think its going to take a deeper level of investment/commitment on behalf of musicians and songwriters. Signing a petition is a start, but its not enough. Taking a picture with a “respect music” sign is a start, but its not enough. We ALL need to invest the time required to EDUCATE ourselves so that we can more easily expose the TRUTH through simple, concise statements of FACT.
The “facts” are that probably 99% of people in the world couldn’t care less about stuff like this.
Not true.
People love new music, and they’re not getting any in the future if artists aren’t paid.
lol right….
Already happening, dude…
sure old man. hey i hear they have this new thing called home taping. you should get rid of it. those blasted kids are going to destroy music if you don’t.
99% of people in the world aren’t dealing directly with this fucked up joke of a market.
And for all the bluster about “digital rights” (meaning just “rights”, right?) propagated by FFTF, Channel Awesome and their 80,000 bot messages that effectively shut out real citizens from a public DMCA commentary govt site, not one single “Fair Use” protester was there at the actual hearing. So they might enough to hit the like button, but not enough actually do anything about it.
Not so with an exponentially growing songwriters and musicians, who are becoming aware, getting pissed and taking this head on.
THE ABUSE WILL FUCKING STOP!!
This is ours to lose. And we’re not looking for a lot of work from musicians and songwriters. The petition is one way to gather e-mail addresses and be ready to launch a counter attack when the last minute cyber attacks based on lies and misinformation ratchets up.
There certainly need to be stronger laws.
For example, so many entire albums are on YouTube. How are these still permitted? That is not “fair use”.