Bob Brisco sends DMCA to Brandon Sheley?

Typical corporate America, do something and then deny it when questioned.

 

Who is your host?

 

We are seeing a typical corporate america business practice.

Bob Brisco does not want to answer any questions, or make himself look bad, so just deny everything and let it blow over.

And I would like to know why yall are not replying to Bob Briscos' tweets. Brandon is, but we have to stand together in the face of such stuff.

Yall can see what I posted here - https://twitter.com/texashiker

 

Uh... I've gotten a few DMCA requests and all of them were delivered by email. So...?

Sending a false DMCA request is a pretty big deal I think.

[SIZE=-1]"I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."[/SIZE]

 

I always ask for hard copies; it's just too easy to spoof an email.

Some pretty good information on best practices; you can send a DMCA via email, but again I'd rather play safe than sorry. You're never going to get in trouble for asking for proper credentials and documentation. It would be silly to take something down solely based on an email communication.

http://www.khulsey.com/filing_dmca_complaint.html

 

I'm fairly certain that if a DMCA has all of the necessary info in it, the host has to forward it on regardless. This is why the penalty of perjury statement is included. Hosts do not have time to verify credentials on the probably thousands of DMCA's they receive a day... and the fact that is supposedly came directly from bob brisco which is why I think it's very likely this is indeed fake. The host will need to verify the email that the DMCA came from and see if it's from an official source.

 

So, those were fake, by any means.
In order to deliver a federal document (which a DMCA request is), you must do so through proper measures. E-Mail is definitely not one of them.

E-Mail is great for "instant communication", though it does not satisfy the proper requirements for DMCA and verification of such

 

ptwiggens, with all due respect that's hardly true. Any decent host will at least carry out a few basic procedures to verify it's validity. I'm speaking from experience, but there is certainly documentation of this kind of practice via a quick Google search:

Edge Web Hosting - DMCA Notice

Asking for a verifiable copy is not going to get you in trouble, ask any lawyer that.

 

Yet they are required to do so.. You can not simply say "this is my content" via email. Who cares about perjury if someone's not even going to take 5 seconds to verify it's real.

Email is not the proper method to send out a DMCA complaint. It must come in through proper methods, with a VALID signature, and be fully investigated. This is why legal departments exist, to handle this stuff.

 

Important Notice about False DMCAs

 

www.theforumhosting.com

I just saw this too, I'll forward the email to vbulletin.com and let them take a look at it.

 

Agreed, E-mail isn't the proper method to send any legal notice, (nor is twitter or other social media outlets.).

The only legal threat I take serious is the one that arrives in my PO Box via certified mail.

 

Everything else aside, I've been investigating hosting companies on this very issue.

A few hosting companies shut sites down immediately while the matter is being investigated, most at least require at least a faxed document to verify there is something infringed, and there are a few that collocate specifically for this issue with redundant sites at different locations/accounts.

I've never heard of Brandon's hosting company.

 

I've sent many DMCA complaints and the content was take offline. There are requirements, but a hard copy is not one of them. I've never once had a company verify with me before forwarding the complaint to the customer. Google is the only company I've dealt with that does not accept email DMCA complaints... But in my experience, the host has never verified the complaint. Presumably if the complaint is false a counter DMCA is sent and that's the end of it until someone sues. In most cases, the host has no way of verifying who actually owns the copyright, so it's a he said she said situation... Aka it's useless to try and verify it, which is why it's left up to a court.

 

You say the complaints were passed onto the customer without verifying.

Care to comment on at what point the hosting providers themselves shut the site down? I'm keenly interested in this issue.

 

And that's terrible practice not to least verify you have a legitimate DMCA. In fact, I don't know what idiot would pull the site down based only on an email complaint. That would end up getting the company in trouble more than anything. As stated before, that's why companies have legal departments and lawyers. You can get in trouble just as easily (and really more easily) for knee-jerk suspending websites based on an unverified complaint.

In reality, there are quite a few companies that require either a faxed or physical copy, that's certainly nothing special. Every single one I've worked for has this procedure. Other major providers like Site5 do, for instance. Perhaps other services accept email, I'm not disputing some, but accepting email and verifying are two different procedures, not necessarily mutually inclusive.

 

Usually it takes them a couple days and then they remove the content. If a counter is not filed, they are required to keep it offline for 2 weeks, and if a lawsuit isn't filed the customer can put it back up. If a counter is filed the customer can put it back up immediately. This system is only designed to take liability off the host... Once both parties have sworn that they own the copyrights, the host can leave the content up without liability and only has to take action if a court orders them to. This makes false DMCA's a non-issue for the person receiving them. They just send a counter DMCA, and they aren't going to get sued by someone who doesn't actually own the rights.

 

Not to spill over but.... thought it would be good reference for this.

 

I am an attorney and have experience with takedown notice. A fake or spoofed takedown notice in an instance like this would seem highly unusual.

1. They can be sent electronically with a digital signature.

2. Who is the person listed who sent the notice?

3. You should have received a copy -did you?

If you want me to look at it in pm or privately, just let's know and glad to help I I can.

 

Let me add - most will also send a written notice. If not to be sure to have legal compliance and hard evidence of send/ receipt, the letterhead may also serve to scare a host into submission and also justify charging the client appropriately.