Forum:Legal Question...
So, I was browsing over the Wikia site, and I noticed on Sannse's talk page this conversation.
My question is, what are we going to do if the DMCA people come after us for the original version of Hamburger.jpg? --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 22:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- We are Uncyclopedia. We can't be taken down or anything. Also, there are people who can deal with that. —
(talk) (contributions) Feb 1 2013 22:46.
- Well, if they do come after us. Well, they're being obnoxious. It's a fucking hamburger. However, it is a fine looking one at least.--Sir Peasewhizz de New York 22:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
If folks send us a takedown notice, if it's reasonable we'll probably just take whatever it is down, replace it with something else. No big deal. -— Lyrithya ༆ 00:54, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- We aren't going to give an extraordinarily formal "fuck you" to them and continue along with our business? --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss
UncyclopedianMeganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 16:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- We aren't going to give an extraordinarily formal "fuck you" to them and continue along with our business? --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss
- Exactly. But do we have a way for people to submit their cease and desist letters to the admins? --EMC [TALK] 01:33 Feb 2 2013
- We
diddo have one, but it is never used. — (talk) (contributions) Feb 2 2013 04:33.
- We're still working on that part. Meantime folks can just dump things on a talkpage, but we do need an address for that, indeed, and especially a way for multiple people to handle stuff from that address. -— Lyrithya ༆ 22:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- I noticed this last week, and was going to make a forum post about it. I need to set up an address on the server for DMCA takedown notices, and then you or one of the others on the tech team needs to check it regularly. We might even need a ticketing system or some such rot. ~ BB ~ (T)
~ Tue, Feb 5 '13 3:19 (UTC)
- I noticed this last week, and was going to make a forum post about it. I need to set up an address on the server for DMCA takedown notices, and then you or one of the others on the tech team needs to check it regularly. We might even need a ticketing system or some such rot. ~ BB ~ (T)
- We're still working on that part. Meantime folks can just dump things on a talkpage, but we do need an address for that, indeed, and especially a way for multiple people to handle stuff from that address. -— Lyrithya ༆ 22:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- We
I still think
we should just give a traditional "Fuck you" to anyone who dares bring a lawsuit against us. Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 21:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- I gladly second that. Copyrights are thoroughly abused as a way for people to be terrible. I think even Ayn Rand, Mrs. "Make As Much Money As Possible," would probably roll over in her grave in a near-perpetual wash cycle if she saw all of the government bullcrap that is going on with copyrights... ...and no, I'm not just angry because one of my YouTube videos was recently taken down in an ERRONEOUS copyright claim... --Gamma287
☭Tetяis? 23:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Official policy:
1: Send an email with the words "Fuck you" to the lawsuit-bringers, signed by the Uncyc populace.
2: Create an article detailing the faggotry these dipshits are trying to cause.
3: Remind everyone that in regards to copyright notices, nobody cares.
This has been a regularly scheduled UNTV propaganda annoucement. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 21:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Lyrithya is right. The advantage with DMCA take down is it costs nothing to implement, but it also costs nothing to the community to comply with it. The problem with not complying is that it then opens the wiki up for legal action. “Fair use” and “protected under parody” are relevant legal defences, but once you get to the point of looking at having to use a legal defence, you're looking at the cost of legal counsel. As an NFP (aka loss making) endeavour, this site collapses under the financial burden. For the sake of protecting an unused image in the history of a page, not much point in opening up to the risk. Of course, any notice needs to be addressed on it's individual legal merit, but if there's sufficient merit for the applicant to proceed to legal recourse - and they have the financial backing to start those proceedings - then the risk (losing the entire wiki) is not balanced by the reward (being able to keep an unused photo of a burger.)
- If the Video Professor comes knocking though I'd suggest he have a warm glass of Fisher Price. Nominally Humane! 09:21 05 Feb
- We're Uncyclopedia. Our goal is to mock, harass, and satirize all things. if someone comes to us with a legal notice and tries to do that shit, they can expect their warnings to not be taken seriously. We're not run by Wikia anymore, so I see no need to act as though Wikia's calling the shots in the legal department. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss
UncyclopedianMeganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 21:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)- Lyrithya is following the “shots called” from Wikia? Nominally Humane! 10:04 05 Feb
- We're Uncyclopedia. Our goal is to mock, harass, and satirize all things. if someone comes to us with a legal notice and tries to do that shit, they can expect their warnings to not be taken seriously. We're not run by Wikia anymore, so I see no need to act as though Wikia's calling the shots in the legal department. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss
From elsewhere
First off, Free Uncyclopedia, or any website for that matter, should have a method of contact with the site owners that does not involve a talk page post. Contacting through a talk page has various issues. The post could be ignored or missed by persons responsible for addressing it. An undue delay in processing a DMCA takedown notice could result in legal penalties. More importantly, it will attract anti-intellectual-property ranters. When dealing with a legal threat, one should maintain a single or limited number of contact persons who know what they are doing. Involving immature people in the process may negatively affect the outcomes of any legal threat and resultant lawsuit.
Second, the DMCA takedown notice in that particular case could not be challenged on fair use grounds. The image was not used anywhere except in the image history. According to US law, fair use is a defense rather than a right. Establishing a fair use "right" for a given image would require a lawsuit, which Free uncyc is financially unable to undertake. Second, even if the court finds in favor of you, it would only apply to those contexts in which the image is currently being used lawfully. Just because a site is parody does not give it fair use rights to all things. That means you would need to police the image to make sure no-one adds it to a page inappropriately. In fact, if a page that it is on is rewritten, it may lose fair-use justification there. Therefore, it is probably easier to comply with the DMCA takedown notice.
Third, who actually legally owns the website/servers? Whoever owns server would be legally responsible for dealing the DMCA takedown notices, and other legal threats. This isn't something the "community" should or even can deal with. I would recommend that whoever is legally liable for the site read up on intellectual property law, as well as privacy and libel issues, and any other relevant legal issues. --Mn-z 21:50, February 5, 2013 (UTC) (Copied over here by Nominally Humane! 09:58 05 Feb)
- We don't negotiate with
terroristsScientologists. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU BossUncyclopedianMeganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 22:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Why not
Why not just do it like Meganew said? Just, like the Pirate Bay, don't give a shit about legal matters. Give a well toned, nice response saying FUCK YOU. Thoughts? ~Y KUN — Tuesday 05 February 2013 22-29-21 ¿
- Here's my logic: If we wouldn't do shit about Scientologists complaining about their material being leaked on our site(same thing they tried and failed to do with the Fisherman Affidavit), why should we do the same for anyone else? We're Uncyclopedia. We don't negotiate legal settlements. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss
UncyclopedianMeganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 22:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)- What he said. Something. I'm going to get some stuff from our leader and see his point of view on this. In my opinion, if we have a photo of a hamburger that was DMCAC'd, then we can just either be bison and take it down or be bison and not even fucking responding to them— which is obviously the superior option. If we (act like tools) and take the item DMCAC'd down than we'd look like pussies— per Zombiebaron, over IRC:
[20:47] Zombiebaron We get people telling us "I love your site, but I don't want to share it with my friends because they will see the content warning and think it is lame"
except with copyright takedown biznittlez instead. Anyways, I'm going on to Facebook to talk to our leader. ~Y KUN — Tuesday 05 February 2013 22-57-45 Ꮈ
- What he said. Something. I'm going to get some stuff from our leader and see his point of view on this. In my opinion, if we have a photo of a hamburger that was DMCAC'd, then we can just either be bison and take it down or be bison and not even fucking responding to them— which is obviously the superior option. If we (act like tools) and take the item DMCAC'd down than we'd look like pussies— per Zombiebaron, over IRC: