Home » Forums » Current Events » LVRJ / Righthaven Lawsuit Info

Possible Precedent: Court Says DMCA Notices Need To Be Properly Filed

Submitted by john2k on Wed, 09/08/2010 - 21:54
in
0 votes

Perfect 10 Loses Again, As Court Says DMCA Notices Need To Be Properly Filed

As per Michael Nystrom:

"In this particular case, I was never contacted by Righthaven, nor the Las Vegas Review Journal"

(the above quoted from http://www.dailypaul.com/node/143700 )

In Perfect 10 v. Google, Round 3 Goes to Google: No Sloppy DMCA Notices

So, in application to the DP case, it very well may be that Righthaven failed to submit a proper takedown notice, which is a requirement of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). I imagine that no takedown notice at all would also be considered similarly as a takedown notice being filed improperly.

»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Good stuff, but that only applies if the notice was

Submitted by samadamscw on Wed, 09/08/2010 - 22:54.

required in the first place. And that is the premise that Righthaven is operating under - that no notice was required because they are only required under certain circucmstances.

Interesting. I had thought

Submitted by john2k on Thu, 09/09/2010 - 02:21.

Interesting. I had thought the takedown notice was a requirement of the DMCA.

Do you know what the specific circumstances are which allegedly relieved Righthaven of the obligation to file a proper takedown notice?

—

...

It is a requirement of the DMCA, their contention is

Submitted by samadamscw on Thu, 09/09/2010 - 02:53.

that the DMCA does not apply here, so there is thus no takedown notice requirement for them to adhere to.

Check the main thread on this that Nystrom posted. It has all the detailed info that you are looking for. (I don't remember if that specific point was in the OP or a comment. It may even be at a link in one of the comments.)

I read through the original

Submitted by john2k on Thu, 09/09/2010 - 03:48.

I read through the original post previously, http://www.dailypaul.com/node/143700 , and didn't see anything related to whatever exception they are claiming to the DMCA.

More than likely the info you're referring to is in one of the nearly 450 comments to that thread as you mentioned. I am very curious about this so will probably read through that entire thread as soon as I have a chance. If you happen to recall where you read the info about the DMCA exception please do post a link to it.

—

...