>The law is also pushing Google to do what it does. DMCA calls for expeditious removal of taken down content, and there is *very little penalties for bogus claims.*
I would have to disagree here. The penalty for knowingly filing a DMCA claim is perjury. Since it is typucally used as a weapon against the little guys though, we've never got to see this actually enforced.
My understanding is that it is a bit more subtle than that. For more exact information, consult a lawyer, instead of random non-lawyers on the Interwebz.
If you file a DMCA claim on behalf on entity E, while knowingly not being entity E, or an authorised agent of entity E, you are committing perjury.
If you file a DMCA claim, you must have done a fair assessment that the material is actually under your copyright. If you know that you do not have the rights to the alleged infringing material, you are (I think) committing perjury.
If you file a DMCA claim, you must consider if fair use applies (but, crucially, I don't think there's a requirement that you reach a correct conclusion.
All of this makes cases like "I have licensed a song by creator C, for use as my intro" and a management firm DMCA-claiming all of your videos for using it a bit dodgy, as they really REALLY should check that before they react to any ContentID-originated "this may infringe". In at least one case[0], the management firm apparently thought the onus was on the licensee to proactively register each uploaded video with the management firm, which seems wrong to me. I would like to see one of those instances taken to court, and (preferably) end up with the conclusion that it is on the filer to consider licensing before making DMCA claims.
[0] No, I don't even recall the name of the creator, but I think he was mostly doing gaming content. There's bound to be more, though.
> In at least one case[0], the management firm apparently thought the onus was on the licensee to proactively register each uploaded video with the management firm, which seems wrong to me.
I would have thought that would be a matter for the contract between the management firm and the licensee. It seems reasonable for a management firm to put such a requirement into a license if that's how they want to keep track of who not to file takedowns against.
I would have to disagree here. The penalty for knowingly filing a DMCA claim is perjury. Since it is typucally used as a weapon against the little guys though, we've never got to see this actually enforced.