this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2023
151 points (100.0% liked)

Android

27901 readers
312 users here now

DROID DOES

Welcome to the droidymcdroidface-iest, Lemmyest (Lemmiest), test, bestest, phoniest, pluckiest, snarkiest, and spiciest Android community on Lemmy (Do not respond)! Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules

1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.

2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.

4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.

5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.

6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.

7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.

8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.

Community Resources:

We are Android girls*,

In our Lemmy.world.

The back is plastic,

It's fantastic.

*Well, not just girls: people of all gender identities are welcomed here.

Our Partner Communities:

!android@lemmy.ml

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
MargotRobbie@lemmy.world
Rooki@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
L3s@lemmy.world
_MoveSwiftly@lemmy.world
151
Google Play keeps banning the same web browser due to vague DMCA notices | Ars Technica (arstechnica.com)
submitted 11 months ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/android@lemmy.world
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 86 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The bigger problem here is how any bad actor can abuse the DMCA system almost with impunity as even if the accused wants to fight back, and even if they grab a lawyer, usually it ends with Google reinstating the app and that's that. The actual abuser never sees any retribution for abusing the system as counterclaims again go through the mediating instance. Google in this case.

If, say, Warner would be locked out of issueing DMCA claims after a dozen fight back within a month or two, that'd be a far bigger deterrent to issueing these spurious claims. Or even better, if they were to suffer fines based on a percentage of their worth for erroneous claims.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 31 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The issue is that nobody at the justice department seems to be interested in pursuing perjury, which is what filing a fake DMCA claim would be punished as.

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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 12 points 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 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 2 points 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.

[–] obinice@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Don't tell me this DMCA thing is just a broken USA thing that the rest of us are forced to endure?

I thought, being as it affects the entire globe's internet community so gigantically, it would be a legal framework agreed upon internationally.

If it's just some thing the Americans made up and fucked up implementing and that's why creators in my country and around the world suffer, that's shite.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 11 months ago

It's a US law that basically any internet company just follows (or they implemented internal processes that just follow its guidelines where you don't even need to file an actual official DMCA request).

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

The issue is that any lawsuit over DMCA abuse must also involve the platform. However, if plaintiffs sue the platform, the platform will kick them off and they'll lose all future income.

[–] limerod@reddthat.com 6 points 11 months ago

It's only going to get worse courtesy of Streisand effect. I read the news about this app a few months ago.

[–] ares35@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

just spitballin' here, but maybe the easy 'fix' is to change the name of the app?