Terrorists used false DMCA claims to get personal data of anti-islamic YouTuber

http://beta.slashdot.org/submission/3961131/terrorists-used-false-dmca-claims-to-get-personal-data-of-anti-islamic-youtuber

by amalag • 12 years ago

150 23 12 years ago

beta.slashdot.org

e40• 12 years ago

It's been pointed out that it's Youtube's policy and not the DMCA that allowed this leak of personal info.

kazinator4• 12 years ago

Also: it's the stupidity of giving your personal info to Youtube in the first place that allows it to leak personal info.

seanp2k2• 12 years ago

"Are you super triple double-dog sure you don't want to use Google with your real name from G+? Your choices are:

- I'm sure, but please ask me every single time I log in going forward - no, please use my real name"

louhike• 12 years ago

Maybe I misunderstood but Youtube asked for its identity if he wanted the channel back online because of the false DMCA notices. And it is Youtube, most people will trust the website to do not disclose their identity like that. They may be wrong, but it is not that stupid if you are not fully informed of the risks.

nitrogen2• 12 years ago

With YouTube integrated into Google single sign-in and Google+, there really may not be much choice.

YokoZar• 12 years ago

That so, Youtube's policies would be vastly different in a world with a different DMCA.

cloudwalking• 12 years ago

This is not true. It is the DMCA which requires disclosing name, address, and telephone number in order to fight a takedown notice.

  If the work was not infringing and the notice was either
  in error or malicious, the client can then file what is
  known as a counter-notice. That notice must contain the
  following elements:
  ...
  4. The subscriber's name, address, and telephone number,
  and a statement that the subscriber consents to the
  jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial
  district in which the address is located, or if the
  subscriber's address is outside of the United States, for
  any judicial district in which the service provider may be
  found, and that the subscriber will accept service of
  process from the person who provided notification.

http://brainz.org/dmca-takedown-101/

anigbrowl2• 12 years ago

That doesn't have to be their personal home address - the intent of the law is to provide claimants with a method of establishing contact that will allow them to serve notice of legal action directly if the matter is not resolved negotiations break down. A PO box would be sufficient.

Suppose you think I infringed your copyright with something I uploaded to YouTube, so you file a takedown notice. I think I'm well within the fair use exemption so I file a counter-notice. You don't agree with my reasoning so you decide to sue me. If you don't have any way to contact me, how would you go about it? You can't get a lawsuit going without proof of having given notice to the other party.

tedunangst• 12 years ago

YouTube could waive their safe harbor provisions on a case by case basis if they cared. If the takedown is egregiously false, YouTube can just say "fuck it, sue us if you still think it's infringement."

pessimizer• 12 years ago

By who, where?

kazinator4• 12 years ago

This can be meta-gamed. Suppose you create a Youtube account and use a fake identity: that of someone you would like to be targetted as terrorists. Then post videos which make them upset, and so it goes.

malkia• 12 years ago

Some kind of honeypot?

kazinator4• 12 years ago

Aha, meta-meta; goad the terrorists into coming out to some staked-out location where they are ambushed.

existencebox• 12 years ago

This was done to some extent/similarity by people honeypotting the standard your standard email scammers, having the scammers run around the country to "pick up the check", go through hilarious hoops, etc, so it's certainly not without precedent.

I shouldn't find this as entertaining an idea as I do, already don't have nearly enough free time...

gohrt2• 12 years ago

Has Google forwarded the original complainants' personal information to the FBI and DoD for follow-up?

AnimalMuppet• 12 years ago

Seems to me that, if anything happens to the author of the video, YouTube is likely to have some serious financial liability issues. That consideration may give some incentive to people like YouTube to be less trigger-happy when they receive a DCMA request.

It's a shame if someone has to die for people to learn that lesson, though...

gohrt2• 12 years ago

Broadcasting on YouTube is very public. Someone needs to stand behind each piece of content. When it's not safe for an individual to do it, someone stronger needs to step in. This is why Edward Snowden needed The Guardian to publish his revelations, instead of posting them on YouTube or SlideShare himself.

Terrorists used false DMCA claims to get personal data of anti-islamic YouTuber

Related Stories