Copyright takedown requests and closing websites
I'm starting a Warhammer canon wiki that will include links to other canon wikis as well as fanfiction articles on a fanfiction wiki, in addition to background information about the canon subject in each article. The trouble is that we don't intend to become a third option as the main source for Warhammer canon information. We also don't have a large staff, and it would not be feasible to write several thousand new articles on subjects that are already written about on other Warhammer canon wikis. Originally we used content from a wiki that used the Creative Commons license and had it permanently displayed. However, those articles were crap and filled with fanfiction. We decided to use content instead from * which is much better and is under the GNU Free Documentation License. The trouble is that there's no obvious indicator, presumably because the Warhammer trademarks are not free license, that the content is under the GFDL. There is a notice on their disclaimer linked on every page that the content can be reused for non commercial use with attribution, which is basically the same as the GFDL, only they aren't risking Games Workshop getting the impression that * is releasing their trademarks.
The trouble is that we no longer collaborate, and their lead bureaucrat has posted a lot of nonsense on Facebook about his conspiracy theory that our fanfiction wiki is part of some Jewish Communist plot to insert Jews and Communists into Warhammer. He has been banned from Sturmkrieg for disruptive sockpuppetry and blackmail, and has impersonated people I know.
The concern that I have is that he might delete the licensing information on his wiki and send DMCA takedown requests to Linode after making it look like their content was never free license. If this happened, would the Linode staff be willing to ignore it or at least leave the takedown decision to us?
It's possible he won't care since we're taking care that we don't "rip off" content and the fact that we forbid users to alter imported content means that they might go to * to work on improving it. (We want people to write their own article rather than changing an imported one) However, he could be afraid that people following the attribution links from Sturmkrieg would lead to Jewish Bolshevism being inserted into *.
15 Replies
Rule of thumb, if an abuse report is a court order / otherwise has legal jurisdiction in New Jersey, Linode will need to make sure that the abusive activity stops / content is removed.
You can file a counter notice, but you'll still need to remove the content first.
@kbar:
If it's a legitimate DMCA, Linode, which is located in the US, cannot simply ignore it.
Rule of thumb, if an abuse report is a court order / otherwise has legal jurisdiction in New Jersey, Linode will need to make sure that the abusive activity stops / content is removed.
You can file a counter notice, but you'll still need to remove the content first.
Would it lead to every website I have being taken down, or would I be able to unpublish just the canon wiki where the content would be located?
And I would file a counter notice in that case. Not only that, but I'd inform the Games Workshop legal department because it is forbidden to assert ownership over their intellectual property.
EDIT
Assume that I would be responding promptly, within four hours if that's the requirement, when informed by Linode.
@kbar:
If it's a legitimate DMCA, Linode, which is located in the US, cannot simply ignore it.
Rule of thumb, if an abuse report is a court order / otherwise has legal jurisdiction in New Jersey, Linode will need to make sure that the abusive activity stops / content is removed.
You can file a counter notice, but you'll still need to remove the content first.
I'm not a lawyer (or American), but if you file a DMCA counter-notice, you don't need to remove the content, and if a provider removed the content, it must be reinstated… The whole point of the counter-notice is to say "I disagree with your assertion that you own the copyright to this content, and you will have to sue me to have it removed."
You may wish to review our Terms of Service:
As well as our privacy policy:
@Guspaz:
@kbar:If it's a legitimate DMCA, Linode, which is located in the US, cannot simply ignore it.
Rule of thumb, if an abuse report is a court order / otherwise has legal jurisdiction in New Jersey, Linode will need to make sure that the abusive activity stops / content is removed.
You can file a counter notice, but you'll still need to remove the content first.
I'm not a lawyer (or American), but if you file a DMCA counter-notice, you don't need to remove the content, and if a provider removed the content, it must be reinstated… The whole point of the counter-notice is to say "I disagree with your assertion that you own the copyright to this content, and you will have to sue me to have it removed."
Sorry, this is completely wrong.
For us to accept a valid counter-notice the content must be removed. And we (your service provider) must allow you to reinstate access in no less than ten business days, and in no more than 14 business days, unless a lawsuit has been filed to prevent you from replacing the access.
In simpler terms, we will tell you when you can replace the content if we've received no notice of legal action. And we cannot legally forbid you from doing so longer than 14 business days, however we must ensure it remains removed for at least 10 business days. This is to allow time for someone to start legal proceedings without the content needing to remain removed an unfair amount of time.
@Inquisitor Sasha:
@kbar:If it's a legitimate DMCA, Linode, which is located in the US, cannot simply ignore it.
Rule of thumb, if an abuse report is a court order / otherwise has legal jurisdiction in New Jersey, Linode will need to make sure that the abusive activity stops / content is removed.
You can file a counter notice, but you'll still need to remove the content first.
Would it lead to every website I have being taken down, or would I be able to unpublish just the canon wiki where the content would be located?
And I would file a counter notice in that case. Not only that, but I'd inform the Games Workshop legal department because it is forbidden to assert ownership over their intellectual property.
EDIT
Assume that I would be responding promptly, within four hours if that's the requirement, when informed by Linode.
As per the legislation, we must ensure that the content is initially removed in an expedited manner. Funny thing about the law, there is no timeframe specified (last I looked). For DMCA notices we allow one 24 hour period (M-F) to have the content removed. If it comes in on a weekend, we do our best to give you until the following weekday to get back to us.
And a valid DMCA notice needs to contain a list of claimed infringing content, otherwise it will not be accepted. So the only content that needs to be removed are those specific URLs, all other content can remain.
Surprisingly enough, the legislation for DMCA is pretty light on legalese and can be understood by us commoners.
Title 17 USC § 512© "Information Residing on Systems or Networks at Direction of Users."
-Tim
Honestly, if he has a problem with using the content from his wiki, we'll probably switch back to the terrible wiki just to avoid trouble. I don't think that should be an issue because allowing copying with attribution often helps membership. Plus if we don't allow imported pages to be edited without started a unique article, I think people would rather go to the original wiki then start a whole new page.
What I think is more likely is that someone might fail to provide attribution, but anyone doing that would be banned. There was an issue when he was on Sturmkrieg before we banned him where a certain admin who will not be mentioned here plagiarized two entire articles off his wiki and he never said anything. Anyone copying content without attribution will be banned.
EDIT
I just found the section again by Games Workshop that says fans aren't allowed imply that they have any rights over fanfiction or other derivative works:
> Please note that we consider any background material you write to be a work which is derivative of our intellectual property. As such, you should refrain from putting any notice claiming that anyone other than Games Workshop Ltd has any right over Games Workshop-owned intellectual property or derivatives thereof.
Provided that it's not a case of someone failing to provide attribution, which I can sympathize with, I'd be having a word with their legal department in such a case.
@Inquisitor Sasha:
Thanks for your response. I don't think it would be a problem, but I want to make sure that the sky isn't going to fall if he decides to think that all he has to do is delete the licensing info off the disclaimer page.
Check the wayback machine at archive.org
As for an attempt at thread hijacking, would Linode object to their customers providing their own DMCA complaint forms/email addresses on their sites? It isn't prohibited by the ToS, so I don't think it should be a problem.
@Inquisitor Sasha:
You mean so it goes to you directly and it would be less likely to result in suspension of the server?
That's part of it. The other part is, I like to be able to handle stuff myself. Also, I'd like to encourage my users to talk to me about their issues instead of feeling like they have to complain to someone else – sort of encouraging a friendly aura around my site
I'd definitely make sure to research the DMCA laws before posting any DMCA complaint forms/emails.
@Piki:
@Inquisitor Sasha:You mean so it goes to you directly and it would be less likely to result in suspension of the server?
That's part of it. The other part is, I like to be able to handle stuff myself. Also, I'd like to encourage my users to talk to me about their issues instead of feeling like they have to complain to someone else – sort of encouraging a friendly aura around my site
:wink: I'd definitely make sure to research the DMCA laws before posting any DMCA complaint forms/emails.
Yeah, that's a good idea. A DMCA takedown request would probably be fulfilled faster that way.
Plus abuse that could get the server suspended is something that I'd like to know about when running a wiki hosting service. Even if it can't get the server suspended, I still want to know about it. All sorts of things are legal in the US that I'm not willing to let people host for free.
@Inquisitor Sasha:
Plus abuse that could get the server suspended is something that I'd like to know about when running a wiki hosting service. Even if it can't get the server suspended, I still want to know about it. All sorts of things are legal in the US that I'm not willing to let people host for free.
Care to so some ASCII art?
Jokes aside, it wouldn't hurt to have your own ToS for your users, along with a few of your friends/relatives to help you monitor. That way, if one of your users does try something, you can deal with it before someone tries complaining to Linode.
Anyways, I think we've demonstrated why thread hijaking is a bad idea – we're now starting to get off topic
@Piki:
@Inquisitor Sasha:Plus abuse that could get the server suspended is something that I'd like to know about when running a wiki hosting service. Even if it can't get the server suspended, I still want to know about it. All sorts of things are legal in the US that I'm not willing to let people host for free.
Care to so some ASCII art?
:lol: Jokes aside, it wouldn't hurt to have your own ToS for your users, along with a few of your friends/relatives to help you monitor. That way, if one of your users does try something, you can deal with it before someone tries complaining to Linode.
Anyways, I think we've demonstrated why thread hijaking is a bad idea – we're now starting to get off topic
:wink: Though technically, it is your thread!
No, it's fine. It's relevant.
I work on ToS pages and I have a few people monitoring stuff, but we can't be everywhere all the time. A good fix, especially with hosting services such as blog hosting or wiki hosting, is to insert links for reporting content in easy to spot places on web applications.
If Mr-conspiracy-theory holds derivative works any license he puts on them is invalid, the works were never his to license.
@sednet:
Talk to games workshop right away. They are your friends and they have a strong interest in keeping their good name clean of whatever conspiracy nonsense this other guy is ranting about.
If Mr-conspiracy-theory holds derivative works any license he puts on them is invalid, the works were never his to license.
I think that's the reason why he doesn't say anywhere that it's under the GNU Free Documentation License. The problem is that his website is much older, and I'm not sure to what extent GW would really care what he says. They might care about the part when he made a blog of us filled with Nazi **** because as a derivative work, everything that we write is theirs, and so he's essentially associating them with Nazis.