From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:58:17 -0500 But, as I read the decision, the court also did not rule out using automatic computer monitoring to identify potentially infringing content and suggested that it might be able to handle a great many of the instances while needing human intervention to make determinations for some cases in grey areas. Sandy Thatcher At 8:34 PM -0400 9/16/15, LIBLICENSE wrote: > > From: Robert Glushko <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 02:07:34 +0000 > > I don't know Sandy, while this isn't the next Campbell, I think > dismissing this as a sideshow is also a bit extreme. I think this > could give well deserved ammunition to people fighting against DMCA > bots and whatnot. A bot can't satisfy this test. > ________________________________________ > > From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 22:51:41 -0500 > > It strikes me that this whole case is a tempest in a semantic teapot > and does not have much real substance to it as far as fair use is > concerned. There is no judgment here that the use of the music by Lenz > was or was not fair use; it is all just a question of whether, in > issuing a takedown notice, Universal considered whether the use might > be fair. Since only a subjective belief that a use was infringing, > including a consideration of whether it was a fair use, is required by > Sec. 512, those who issue takedown notices simply need to acknowledge > that they considered whether the use was fair--and since fair use is > so difficult to determine, that is a very thin requirement. So I don't > see this case as having much impact on DMCA disputes moving forward. > It is a sideshow at best. > > Sandy Thatcher > > > >> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:45:24 -0400 >> Subject: Fair Use Review Must Precede DMCA Takedowns >> >> https://www.law360.com/articles/702339 >> >> Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider-in good faith >> and prior to sending a takedown notification-whether allegedly >> infringing material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly >> contemplates as authorized by the law," the appeals court wrote. "That >> this step imposes responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason >> for us to reject it. >> >> Full text of the opinion (9 pages; PDF) in Lenz vs. Universal Music is >> available here: >> >> >> https://www.scribd.com/doc/280946517/Opinion-From-United-States-Court-of-Appeals-9th-Circuit-Lenz-vs-Universal-Music >> >> Comments are welcomed on what seems to be an important decision. >> >> Thank you, Ann Okerson