|Three music labels were order to pay damages after issuing bogus DMCA notices which damaged an artist's reputation. A hip hop artist Jonathan Emile teamed up with Kendrick Lamar on a track, but the music labels took it down from streaming services and online stores.
Copyright owners issue millions DMCA takedown notices to service providers all over the world every day. For example, Google received a billion notices in the past year. Most of them comply with the law, but part of them is duplicates, erroneous, or even malicious. In any case, no one had ever been punished for sending false notices – until now.
A recent court case in Canada has changed that. The case dates back in 2012 when Kendrick Lamar wrote verses for the track of rapper Jonathan Emile. Lamar got paid but the paperwork wasn’t duly done. The track was released in 2015, but it was quickly pulled from YouTube, iTunes, SoundCloud and other websites because of bogus copyright claims from Lamar’s music labels.
Although the labels had no right to take the track down (which the court agreed with), the damage had been done and all momentum to promote the song had been lost. Moreover, Emile’s fans could believe that he had stolen the verse from Lamar. This is why the rapper decided to sue the labels in Canada. The artist asked for a token amount in damages – just about $11,000 – after the music labels removed his track for 2 months using false DMCA warnings. None of the labels appeared in court to defend themselves, so the artist won by default. The court used Copyright Act to determine an appropriate damages award – $3,700 as moral and material damages to be solidarily paid by the defendants and an additional amount of $750 per defendant as punitive damages.
Thanks to TorrentFreak for providing the source of the article.
Thursday, December 1st, 2016
|posted by (2016-12-01 15:49:13)|
|Why would the labels appear in court? It would have cost them more in lawyers fees than the eventual judgement. The judgement of $3700.00 is less than the cost of hookers and blow for one nights out for the execs of labels involved.|
Hard to see how this case will have any effect on the number of DMCA takedown notices issued false or otherwise
|posted by (2016-12-01 15:52:13)|
|It's no wonder they didn't appear in court ... it would have cost them more in travel expenses than what they had to pay. HOWEVER, BECAUSE they didn't appear there's now a legal precedent for any artist to use in the future.|
|They drop more cocaine off the mirror after they do a line then he asked for.|
|posted by (2016-12-02 19:55:10)|
|Copyright owners and Google/Microsoft/etc(NSA/***) hire hacker thieves in every sense of the word. They target peoples WIFI, even put cameras in peoples homes and take over their computers if they find a potential target or can get into the home. It's hard to know the overall success since it's not legal with secret courts(FISA, etc). Lets also not forget the lone hacker/thief also. Punishing false DMCA take downs doesn't seem to hold a candle. Gotta start somewhere though.|
|posted by (2016-12-03 09:30:49)|
|I'm actually holding back on a lot of things I want to say in the matter. I could literally write a book, but your right XpoZ. I'm actually a victim of of it. No one desires finding out someone has been watching your family/activities 24 hrs a day for years like me. Not just that, but using it to loot the home etc. Tried law enforcement, they have no clue what to do.|
|posted by (2016-12-03 11:09:42)|
|$3700 for fcking someones life is DIRT CHEAP. DIRT DEEDS PAID DIRT CHEAP! (AcDc)|
|This can happen to anyone, pitiful.|
|Plz upload rocky handsome move in 1080p|
|Moving the needle is war of inches. If Labels are prepared to flee the field for the little battles that fine by me. With a billion+ DMCA's a year you've got to imagine that there are enough illegitimate to kill the labels 3700$ at a time. Death by a thousand DMCA papercuts!||
Most Popular Stories