This is a lack of attention on the parts of those paid to hunt infringement. It's also a large part of why things get taken down that have nothing to do with their property. It's automated and no one is at the helm to make a decision. Bots are terrible at making fair use claims or deciding that something isn't theirs if it closely matches.
But what I really want to know I'll mention after this quote of part of a DMCA claim that is required to be part of the take down request.
Quote:
|
(vi) Include a statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
|
After the take downs of the Hugo Awards, the DNC speech, NASAs Curiosity Landing video, and many other examples I could include, such as the take down from a guy recording an outside hike (because the birds in the background triggered an automatic DMCA take down over a song that had birds in the background) I want to know who is filing perjury charges against false claims. I would be willing to bet one or two guilty verdicts would straighten all this out.