Seng (2014)
Contents
Source Details
| Seng (2014) | |
| Title: | The state of the discordant union: An empirical analysis of DMCA takedown notices |
| Author(s): | Seng, D. |
| Year: | 2014 |
| Citation: | Seng, D. (2014). The state of the discordant union: An empirical analysis of DMCA takedown notices. 18 Va. J. L. & Tech. 369. Available at SSRN 2411915 |
| Link(s): | Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | Beard, Ford and Stern (2018), Carpou (2016), Cotropia and Gibson (2016), Dholakiya et al. (2014), Elkin-Koren, Nahmias and Perel (2019), Erickson and Kretschmer (2019), Ibosiola et al. (2019b), Seng (2015b), Urban, Karaganis and Schofield (2017a), Urban, Schofield and Karaganis (2017b) |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | For this study, the cut-off date for the notices in the base dataset is December 31, 2012. The notices were additionally post-processed to correct for errors. This yielded a slightly reduced dataset of 539,000 notices (N1=539,558) between January 2001 and December 2012 (“first dataset”). After a six-month long exploratory study, a decision was made to also conduct a census of all formbased notices submitted to Google within the first dataset (N2= 501,286 notices). It is this dataset that is used to analyze the notices and requests in this paper. |
| Data Type: | Secondary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | No |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | No |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): | |
Abstract
By conducting a census on half-a-million takedown notices and more than 50 million takedown requests in its datasets, this paper takes a detailed and systematic look at the state of the takedown process from an empirical perspective. It examines the use and issuance of takedown notices by copyright owners and reporters and the response of service providers to them. It further studies the relationship between the notices and requests and safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and identifies ways in which the takedown process can be further improved to preserve the diversity and freedom of the Internet.
Main Results of the Study
- The DMCA takedown mechanism, a bold and innovative experiment that allows content owners, service providers and Internet users to arbitrate their differences, has worked remarkably well. And its success is due in no small part to its ability to temper our individual initiative and creativity with our commitment to participate in a positive way in a worldwide conversation.* But We have changed from sending notices with one or two takedown requests to sending thousands of notices with millions of requests to service providers.* With this comes a lack oftransparency about arrangements for automated submission and processing of “mega” notices, and of incessant user failure to respond to and correct abusive and erroneous takedowns.* In order to improve the situations, all notices by all reporters should be treatied fairly and equally. Infringing content should be accurately detected and removed with precision. The online voices of the small and disenfranchised must be preserved, otherwise they may be silenced forever.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
All notices by all reporters should be treated fairly and equally. Infringing content should be accurately detected and removed with precision. The online voices of the small and disenfranchised must be preserved, otherwise they may be silenced forever.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
| Sample size: | 50,000,000 |
| Level of aggregation: | Takedown requests |
| Period of material under study: | 2001-2012 |
| Sample size: | 501,286 |
| Level of aggregation: | Takedown notices |
| Period of material under study: | 2001-2012 |
