Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Scribd's Official Reponse to the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association, Scribd Blog, 9.2.07

Scribd's Official Reponse to the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association, Scribd Blog, 9.2.07

Ratings: (0)|Views: 104|Likes:
Published by Scribd

More info:

Published by: Scribd on Mar 12, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Scribd's Official Reponse tothe Science Fiction andFantasy Writers Association(SFWA)
Scribd's Official Reponse to the Science Fiction and FantasyWriters Association (SFWA)
September 2, 2007September 1, 2007Dr. Andrew BurtVice-PresidentScience Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America, Inc.Dear Dr. Burt:I am an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). I write today as legal counselrepresenting Scribd.com. If SFWA is represented by counsel in connection with the matter discussedbelow, please let me know so that I may direct future correspondence accordingly.On August 17, 2007, you sent an email to Scribd.com on behalf of SFWA alleging that numerousitems hosted on Scribd.com allegedly infringed the copyrights of authors who you claimed torepresent. On August 27, 2007, you confirmed in another email that your earlier communication wasintended as a formal notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).We have now heard from no fewer than four authors whose works were improperly targeted by your notice. They confirm that they have never authorized SFWA to act as their DMCA enforcement agent.As a result, it appears that your notice constituted a misrepresentation both of your authority to act ontheir behalf and that the targeted materials were infringing.Scribd.com takes its copyright responsibilities seriously and complies in every particular with therequirements of the DMCA. Upon receipt of a compliant DMCA takedown notice, Scribd.com acts topromptly remove any materials uploaded by its users. But Scribd.com does not take lightly your apparently careless invocation of the DMCA to remove content without any valid justification.I understand and appreciate that SFWA has taken steps to apologize to Scribd.com users whosematerials were improperly removed as a result of your notice. This letter is intended to prevent anyrepetition of these unfortunate events. While we will continue to consider valid DMCA takedownnotices sent on behalf of rightsholders who you are authorized to represent, this letter puts you onnotice than any further takedown notices that contain misrepresentations may expose you and SFWAto liability (including attorneys fees) pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 512(f). This would include not only noticesthat misrepresent about your authority to act on behalf of rightsholders, but also any notices thattarget activities (such as the inclusion of small excerpts of copyrighted material within larger originalworks) that are plainly noninfringing fair uses.
See Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc.,
337F.Supp.2d 1195, 1204 (N.D. Cal. 2004) (imposing liability for sending DMCA takedown noticestargeting obvious fair uses).[1]Moreover, none of your recent communications have been in compliance with the requirements of theDMCA. As you should know, the DMCA requires that a takedown notice be in writing and includeeach of the following pieces of information:(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of anexclusive right that is allegedly infringed.(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted
works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works atthat site.(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activityand that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficientto permit the service provider to locate the material.(iv) Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party,such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which thecomplaining party may be contacted.(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in themanner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, thatthe complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedlyinfringed.
17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A).Your recent communications conspicuously fail to meet several of these requirements, including thelack of a statement under penalty of perjury that you are acting with the authority of the copyrightowner and any identification of the work you allege is being infringed. In addition, the law requires thatall of these elements must appear in a single communication, rather than spread across numerousemail messages.
See Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC,
488 F.3d 1102, 1113 (9th Cir. 2007).You may wish to review the most recent ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the DMCA,which presciently predicted the harm Scribd.com users appear to have suffered as a result of your noncompliant notices:In order to substantially comply with 512(c)(3)s requirements, a notification must do more thanidentify infringing files. The DMCA requires a complainant to declare, under penalty of perjury, that heis authorized to represent the copyright holder, and that he has a good-faith belief that the use isinfringing. This requirement is not superfluous.
Accusations of alleged infringement have drasticconsequences: A user could have content removed, or may have his access terminatedentirely. If the content infringes, justice has been done. But if it does not, speech protectedunder the First Amendment could be removed.
We therefore do not require a service provider tostart potentially invasive proceedings if the complainant is unwilling to state under penalty of perjurythat he is an authorized representative of the copyright owner, and that he has a good-faith belief thatthe material is unlicensed.
See Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC,
488 F.3d at 1112 (emphasis added).The law clearly entitles Scribd.com to ignore noncompliant DMCA notices entirely.
17 U.S.C.512(c)(3)(b)(ii). Consequently, by failing to meet the requirements of the statute, you run the risk thatyour notices will be rejected in their entirety (including any legitimate allegations of infringement thatthey may include), an outcome that would be unfortunate for the rightsholders SFWA represents.We trust that, in light of this incident, any future DMCA notices sent by SFWA shall substantiallycomply with all the requirements set forth in the statute.Sincerely,Fred von LohmannSenior Intellectual Property Attorneyfred@eff.org

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
ScribeSci liked this
ScribeSci liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->