On Fri, 09 May 2003 12:50:27 EDT, Kai Schlichting <kai@pac-rim.net> said:
> Specifically: does the DMCA make an ISP liable for copyright
> infringement (rather than merely denying the safe heaven) of its customers
> if the ISP refuses to play along with the RIAA/MPAA bullies and does not
> make the alleged content unavailable, lacking any evidence presented that
> establishes the unlawful infringement with a preponderance of evidence
IANAL, but yes, you become liable if you intentionally drag your feet and
don't make the content unavailable "expeditiously". (a)(1), (b)(1), and (c)(1)
all say "you are not liable for monetary relief if you comply". There's some
stuff about injunctions down in (j) that usually won't get invoked because
it's more work for the complaintant - those basically boil down to "If you
don't comply with a 512 takedown order, they'll show up with a court order
telling you to do almost exactly the same thing".
The only notice I've received to date was from Lucasfilm Ltd., and I sent
them a letter suggesting they hire a lawyer to read the law to them and
explain it.
