Enter to open, tab to navigate, enter to select
Copyright Office Requests Comment on DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions
Practical Law Legal Update w-001-1303 (Approx. 3 pages)
Copyright Office Requests Comment on DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions
by Practical Law Intellectual Property & Technology
| Published on 31 Dec 2015 • USA (National/Federal) |
The US Copyright Office is requesting public comments for a study assessing section 512 of the Copyright Act, which codified the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) providing "safe harbor" shielding complying internet service providers (ISPs) from liability for copyright infringement by third parties on the ISPs’ systems or networks.
On December 31, 2015, the US Copyright Office issued a notice requesting public comments for a public study assessing section 512 of the Copyright Act, which codified Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) provisions that provide a "safe harbor" shielding complying internet service providers (ISPs) from liability for copyright infringement by third parties users of their systems or networks (80 FR 81862-01) (17 U.S.C. §512).
Specifically, the Copyright Office is seeking comments on:
- The general effectiveness of the safe harbor provisions, including, among other things:
- whether safe harbors are working as Congress intended;
- whether courts have properly construed section 512;
- how section 512 has impacted the development of online services and the protection and value of copyrighted works.
- Section 512's notice-and-takedown provision, including, among other things:
- whether the provision sufficiently addresses online infringement and the reappearance of previously removed infringing material;
- how burdensome the notice-and-takedown process is, and whether it is a workable long-term solution;
- how the process works differently for individuals, small-scale entities, and large-scale entities;
- the role of both human and automated notice-and-takedown processes;
- whether there are technologies or processes that would improve the efficiency of notice-and-takedown; and
- whether the notice-and-takedown process sufficiently protects against fraudulent, abusive, or unfounded notices.
- The effectiveness of counter notifications.
- Courts' interpretations of the legal standards in section 512.
- The clarity and effectiveness of the "repeat infringer" policies in section 512(i)(A).
- Service providers' accommodation of "standard technical measures" as outlined in section 512(i).
- Remedies, including:
- whether section 512(g)(2)(C), which requires a copyright owner to bring a federal suit within ten business days to keep allegedly infringing content offline and a counter-notifying party to defend such a suit, is reasonable and effective;
- whether the limited injunctive relief available under section 512(j) is sufficient; and
- whether the remedies for misrepresentation in section 512(f) are sufficient to deter fraudulent or abusive notices and counter notifications.
The Copyright Office must receive written comments by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on March 21, 2016. The office will post specific instructions for submitting comments on its website on or before February 1, 2016.
The Copyright Office will announce one or more public meetings after it receives initial written comments.