DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT TAKEDOWN NOTICE

(DMCA)

It is not permissible to freely use content belonging to someone else. If it is found that you are infringing on someone's copyright, the DMCA requires ISPs to remove the content immediately.

RESPONDING TO A DMCA TAKEDOWN NOTICE

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) - What is it?

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, also known as the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, was added to the federal copyright laws to implement protection to those that have copyrights that have been infringed upon on the internet.


The DMCA is a measure in which was created to criminalize the theft of one’s work without consent. Not only does this Act protect the copyright owners, but it also protects the Internet Service Provider (ISP) and website operators from being sued if content is illegitimately posted on their platforms.



When an owner of a creative work has protection, they have an exclusive right to copy or distribute that said work. When an author has works such as videos, music, articles and more, they are the only ones who can license the use of the work to others. 

DMCA Takedown - What is it?

Most ISPs and web host have their own methods for discovering a copyright infringement through the use of their own automated systems, or when a copyright owner files a DMCA takedown. The DMCA highlights a process for removing materials that infringe upon a copyright.


Furthermore, each ISP or web host has a system that will intervene when content violates a copyright. For instance, Facebook will remove a video from your timeline if it’s posted with copyrighted music, YouTube will mute or delete the music, Twitch will disable a stream from your channel, and so on.


Regardless of the procedures, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is in place to require service providers to remove materials that infringe upon an owner’s copyright as quickly as possible. Additionally, the DMCA protects these providers from being sued by the copyright owners, so as long as they remove the infringing content.



If you have posted infringing content, you will get a warning notice, also known as a strike, from the service provider. Typically, after three “strikes” the service providers will terminate the account. If it is found that an individual knowingly and willingly post copyrighted material, they can be subject to lawsuits and even criminal penalties. 

What To Do If You Get A DMCA Takedown

Procedures for providers vary, but usually follow the same process regarding giving notice and the next steps if infringement continues. Unfortunately, good intentions do not relieve you from consequences if you infringe upon someone’s copyrights. You risk still being held accountable even if you didn’t intend to steal someone’s intellectual property.


For instance, say you are a dancer that post inspirational videos on YouTube. In these videos, music in which you are dancing to can be heard, but no permission has been granted to use such sound in your videos. In return, YouTube sends you a notice stating they are muting the music in your video. This places a strike against you since you used music that does not belong to you.



Even though you may have not realized that you did anything wrong, it’s best to not repeat this mistake again. If you commit to no further infractions and agree to complete with YouTube’s copyright school, the strike can be removed from your account within six months. If you decide to disregard the notice and continue to post videos using copyrighted music, you run the risk of YouTube suspending your account and possibly receiving a lawsuit from the copyright’s owner. 

a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it .

Additional DMCA Copyright Focus 

ISPs and Copyright Infringements

How is it that ISPs find out about copyright infringement? Well, there are usually two ways in which they are notified. One is they have their own systems in which it has algorithms that scan for infringing music and videos or the creator files a DMCA Takedown.


So as long as the creator’s request to have their material removed from a specific platform meets the requirements defined by the DMCA, the ISP or website is obligated to remove the said material.



Furthermore, it’s important to recognize that ISPs, social media sites, and similar platforms aren’t mandated to judge the merits of a takedown notification. The only purpose is to act as an intermediate between the person who claims ownership of the work and the person who is accused of infringement. It is possible that you may receive a notice that is unwarranted. 

What Should You Do If You Receive A Takedown Notice by Mistake?

If you receive a takedown notice and you feel that you have not infringed upon a copyright, you are eligible to file a counter notification. It’s crucial to be certain though, that you did not commit copyright infringement before submitting. It should be known that takedown notices and counter notifications are legal documents, and if the owner of a copyright takes you to court and you lose the case, you will be faced with paying costly legal fees and damages.



That said, it has been proved that there are instances in which a takedown notice was not warranted, and even in some cases, a blatant lie. Also, keep in mind that a competitor might file a false takedown notice if you are found using a short snippet of a sound, or if your usage falls under the fair use doctrine. 

What Is The Fair Use Doctrine?

The fair doctrine allows one to use copyrighted work without permission if it qualifies to one of the following:


  • Criticism
  • Commentary
  • News reporting
  • Teaching
  • Research

Filing A Counter Notification

ISPs and web host have a form online that you can file a counter notification. A notification can also be sent directly by writing to the ISP or web host. The notification should include the following:


  • Name
  • Address
  • Email
  • Phone number
  • Date
  • Description of the material that was removed, or disabled, its location (URL) prior to the removal, and the date of removal
  • Statement reflecting why you feel there was a mistake made in the removal or misidentification
  • Your consent to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which your address is located, and your acceptance of service from the person who provided the takedown notice
  • Your signature affirming that you understand you’ve made your statement under penalty of perjury.


Most ISPs have specific requirements for filing a notification of any sort and might require additional information be sent outside of their automated systems. Additionally, you can find the forms needs on their websites. 

What To Expect When You File A Counter Notification

It should be noted that ISP or website host are not required to weigh the merits of your counter notification. Once they receive your notification, the party that sent to takedown notice is notified. If the other party still feels that you have infringed on their copyright, they have 14 days to file a lawsuit against you.


If the copyright owner decides to sue you, it’s wise to be prepared to go to court and defend your stance. If no lawsuit is filed, the service provider must restore your content and they usually remove any strike that was applied to your account. 




CLIENT MATTERS


5,000+


YEARS OF SERVICE

 25+

Award Winning

Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.

Expert Team

Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you. 

Quality Representation

You’ll find the support you need to ensure that things run smoothly. We’re here to help with all your legal needs.

Meet Our Team

View All
A person is holding a cell phone in front of a book titled artificial intelligence
By John Wilson February 19, 2025
Copyright and Translated Content: Who Owns the Creative Rights? Understanding Copyright Law and Translation Copyright law protects creative work and bestows sole authority over the work upon the creators. For example, the owner of the work of a novel has the right over the work under the concept of the right under the copyright. Courts have found that “the degree of protection afforded by the copyright is measured by what is actually copyrightable in the publication and not by the entire publication.” See, e.g., Dorsey v. Old Sur. Life Ins. Co., 98 F.2d 872, 873 (10th Cir. 1938) (emphasis added). For translations, the situation is not very clear. Translations involve creative judgments over word translation and not the translation of mere words. Hence the knowledge about the applicability of the concept of the right over the work is essential for establishing the right over the work. For example, a Court in the Northern District of California stated that: “ the determinative question is whether Plaintiff holds a valid copyright. ” Signo Trading Intern. Ltd. v. Gordon, 535 F. Supp. 362, 363 (N.D. Cal. 1981). The Signo Trading Court dismissed Plaintiff’s infringement claims because plaintiff did not have a valid copyright as a matter of law in the translations and transliterations at issue because they lacked the “requisite originality.” Id. at 365. Can Translation Be Considered a Creative Process? The Practice of Translating Translation goes beyond the replacement of one word by the equivalent word from the source text. Translating literary work, poetry, and fiction with deeper meanings beyond the surface text is a complex, artistic process. Translating books like The Iliad, for instance, requires the practice of artistic translation to translate the emotions, thoughts, and the culture correctly. Technical Translations and Legal Translations Conversely, technical writing and texts for the law need less creativity and instead value correctness over all else. These writing forms require strict adherence to the original sense, leaving very little room for artistic interpretation. Translations for these writing forms thus typically involve less creative contribution and less potential for the work being protected by copyright. Why Is Creativity Important for Translations for Copyright? Originality when translating For a work to be subject to copyright, some creativity, however slight, is essential. Even when the translation is taken from the work, the translation also includes some creative work by the translator. This creativity can make the translation subject to copyright. A derivative work must “recast, transform[], or adapt[]” a preexisting work and “consist[] of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship.” Id. In other words, it must change or alter the pre-existing work’s content and must itself be an original work of authorship. The Supreme Court stated that “ [t]he sine qua non of copyright is originality ” and that “ [t]o qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. ” Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991) at 345. “Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author (as opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity.” Id. (citing 1 M. Nimmer & D. Nimmer, Copyright §§ 2.01[A], [B] (1990)). In granting a Rule 12 motion to dismiss, the Signo Trading Court held that: " It is inconceivable that anyone could copyright a single word or a commonly used short phrase, in any language. It is also inconceivable that a valid copyright could be obtained for a phonetic spelling, using standard Roman letters, of such words or phrases. Although lists of words and translations of larger works may be copyrightable, Plaintiff cannot claim credit for any of the elements which make those things copyrightable. For these reasons, Plaintiff does not hold a valid copyright on the translations or transliterations ... " Signo Trading, 535 F. Supp. at 365. The Problem of the Derivative Work However, translations are generally "derivative works" - derived from the work of another. Because of this, the owner or author of the work is generally required to agree to the translation. Translations made illegally can be held under the classification of copyright violations, even when the translator has added creative elements. Who Has the Right over the Translated Work? Employer-Commissioned Translations Ownership of the copyright for the translation work varies. If the translation is commissioned by the owner of the original work, the owner will retain the right. Even when the translator adds creativity by passing over the original emotions and thoughts, the owner will not necessarily lose the right over the translation work. In some circumstances, the translation work can be accredited by the translator without them holding the right over the work. Independent Translations If a translation is performed independently by the translator, the translator can even be identified as the co-author of the translation. Nevertheless, the author typically has the underlying copyright, restricting the translator’s right over the work. Creative Translations from the Public Domain In certain cases, a translation may be creative enough to warrant its own copyright. For example, a translator adapting a classic work or a book in the public domain into modern language may introduce enough originality to qualify for copyright protection. However, direct, word-for-word translations are typically not considered original enough to receive new copyright protection. What About Machine Translations? The Human Creativity Copyright Requirement Machine-generated translations, including those produced by platforms like OpenAI , operate through advanced algorithms that replicate language patterns rather than capture the human touch. Unlike translations crafted by human translators who often infuse cultural insight and genuine emotion into the work, OpenAI's output is rooted in statistical patterns and data. Consequently, while these translations are impressively efficient and accurate, they typically fall short of the originality required for copyright protection. This distinction underscores the human creativity requirement needed to secure a valid copyright . Ultimately, although machine-generated translations serve as powerful tools, they do not offer the same legal and creative protections as those provided by human translators. The Bottom Line: Navigating Copyright in Translations Translations occupy the middle ground under the law of the copyright. Albeit the right of the original author generally has the right under the copyright, the right under the copyright can also be claimed by the translator provided the translation is creative enough. Central considerations here include the creativity the translator has added, the nature of the work being translated, and whether the work is under the public domain. These considerations establish the right of the owner under the copyright for the translation. Why Wilson Whitaker Rynell for Your Copyright Work? At Wilson Whitaker Rynell, our professional lawyers specialize in the practice of copyright law and copyright litigation , including the complex subject matter of translation work. We can provide you with advice about the ownership of your work under the provisions of the copyright, and protect your creative property. If you are the author, the publisher, or the translator, you can rely upon the advice from our firm. Copyright Translation FAQS
A man is sitting at a desk looking at a computer screen after getting an ISP copyright demand notice
By John Wilson May 27, 2024
How to Respond to a Copyright Infringement Notice from Your ISP: A Step-by-Step Guide
two people are looking at a floor plan of a house
By Kayla Holderman December 7, 2023
Copyright Protection For House Plans
Show More