• OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s difficult. Perjury requires intent. If a badly trained employee in a hurry makes a mistake that’s not perjury.

    This means it’s legal, under the current law, to badly train your employees and to set them quotas for the amount of DMCA takedowns they have to serve.

    They’re not intentionally making false statements.

    To stop this, you need to create new explicit penalties for bad takedown requests.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      There’s plenty of examples of companies intentionally filling DMCA claims to screw competitors. As far as I know nobody’s ever seen any consequences for this. The law is broken when there’s no actual punishment for abuse.

    • Quasari@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If it’s repeated offenses like the example in the article, it’s a little harder to prove it wasn’t intentional.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think the problem is that it shows irresponsibility, however the law requires intent. That’s sadly - or well, I suppose overall it’s a good thing! - a very different beast on a legal level.