Cory Doctorow's


RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URL to TrackBack this entry is:

  1. […] Read the full statement @ […]

    Pingback by Cory Doctorow’s statement on Fox taking down his cc-licensed novel | The Travelin' Librarian — April 22, 2013 @ 4:06 am

  2. Maybe they have some sort of takedown sweatshop?

    Comment by Morten Juhl-Johansen Zölde-Fejér — April 22, 2013 @ 4:19 am

  3. It’s high time somebody, somewhere, somehow challenged these companies on their bogus takedowns.

    And you’re the perfect man for the job, Cory!

    Comment by jupiterkansas — April 22, 2013 @ 6:27 am

  4. Good luck! You’re up against a big-media wall that has probably already copyrighted the word ‘Homeland’ now and forever in every context possible. It’s been a while since I’ve read you, but I think I’ll go out and buy more of your work, at the very least on principle.

    Comment by Trenton — April 22, 2013 @ 7:43 am

  5. There’s no copyright in words, only trademarks, and the DMCA doesn’t apply to trademarks. But yes, buying more books is always good!

    Comment by Cory Doctorow — April 22, 2013 @ 7:46 am

  6. Now is the time to bring out that copyright math calculator. Sue the bastards.

    Not only is there damage to you, there is damage to the genre and Canada. And that copyright math calculator will make it worth a lawyer’s while. EFF may help as well.

    If you start a fund to support your suit against, I will contribute.

    Comment by Matt H. — April 22, 2013 @ 7:52 am

  7. Thanks for that. I’ve talked to EFF. If I do something legal, it’ll be to make a good precedent, not to get rich.

    Comment by Cory Doctorow — April 22, 2013 @ 7:57 am

  8. Oh, god, how awesome would it be if someone at Fox was imprisoned for perjury because of this.

    Comment by copylefter — April 22, 2013 @ 9:05 am

  9. since they’re in essence fraudulently claiming to be the rightsholder to your work, i imagine you could sue them for infringement…

    Comment by Mary — April 22, 2013 @ 6:44 pm

  10. It’s most likely being flagged by automated software, not an actual human being — see Ars’s piece at , which notes that in 2011 WB sent a takedown notice for the URL “ and give them the details of where the link was posted and the link and they will deal with the @sshole who posted the fake.”

    I think you’ve actually hit on the “How could anyone be so careless?” question with your observation about the massive loophole in proving fraudulent takedowns are deliberate: it’s actually easier for a company to claim it didn’t KNOWINGLY issue a fraudulent takedown notice if it intentionally uses the broadest, most poorly-designed automated takedown system possible.

    The less thought and care they put into issuing takedowns, the more legal protection they have when they send out a fraudulent one.

    Comment by Thad — April 23, 2013 @ 7:06 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Close this window.

0.033 Powered by WordPress