Abstract
Introduction 552 I. Statutory Background and the Current Case Law on RoboTakedowns 556 A. History and Purpose of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act 556 1. Overview 556 2. The Section 512(c) Takedown Procedure 557 3. The Section 512(g) Counter-Notification Procedure 558 B. “Robo-Takedown” Defined 559 1. The “Whack-a-Mole” Problem: The Evolution of RoboTakedowns in Response to High Volume Repeat Offenders 559 2. Standard for Determining “Abusive” Takedown Regimes 559 C. Evolution of the Section 512(f) Misrepresentation Standard .... 561 1. Diebold 561 2. Rossi 562 3. Lenz 563 II. The Problematic Notice-and-Takedown Environment of Today ......... 564 A. Defining the “Problem” of Robo-Takedowns 564 1. Overbroad Takedown Requests 565 2. Lack of User Pushback 566 B. Determining the Scope of the Problem 567 1. Urban and Quilter Study 569 2. Seng Study 570 3. The Takedown Project 572 4. The NYU Counter-Notification Study 572
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
