|
Forums >
General Industry >
Tumblr and DMCA takedown requests
Does anyone know how long it takes for Tumblr to respond to DMCA takedown requests? Jun 16 13 07:43 pm Link They are usually pretty quick if they are a properly formatted request. I am going to ask some questions though: 1. Did you send the request or did someone else send it? 2. If you sent it, did you send it as the llama or the photographer? I am asking the question because, if the request was from you, as a llama, they might not take down the image at all. Generally speaking, the llama will not hold the copyright, the photographer will. Only the owner of the copyright may submit a DMCA takedown notice. If this was a proper takedown notice sent by you, as the photographer, or by another photographer, in most cases they will be fairly quick (within a few days). If they don't respond promptly, they lose their protection under the DMCA. If the notice was not properly sent, they may simply ignore it. Jun 16 13 09:54 pm Link A lot of butt hurt over at Tumblr in the last couple of days - - - http://dougspringer.ca/post/52984098507 … -has-begun 14 JUNE 2013 The Yahooing of Tumblr has begun... Bohemea, one of the larger/more popular/higher profile blogs on Tumblr was deleted without notice or warning today as a result of a DMCA complaint. Apparently all of this sharing of copyrighted material MUST STOP [bangs fist on desk]. Yeah, because that’s not 90% of Tumblr… Read the responses to this blog post. Very educational about the mindset of "Tumblrs" also see http://suicideblonde.tumblr.com/post/52 … -can-it-be Taken down and told to file a proper counter-notice DUH!!! Studio36 EDIT: BTW, I noted previously from a published article, after the recent sale of Tumlr to Yahoo, that Yahoo is seriously concerned about 2257 compliance, or rather non-compliance, on the blogs. With that knowledge comes liability - see: 47 USC 230(e)(1) Jun 17 13 05:03 am Link Tumblr is definitely taking people down... bohemea ( I think that's how she spelled it) was deactivated last week and she probably had 80,000 plus followers She supposedly posted a pic and gave full credit to the photographer (who had a "post to tumblr button" got a DMCA and they shut her down She was actually an "editor" for tumblr (I don't know what that means) and that didn't seam to matter. Things are definitely changing on tumblr... Edit: studio36uk posted before I was able to finish my post Jun 17 13 05:05 am Link When it comes to the DMCA there are only two things you can do in response to a take down notice properly sent to Yahoo / Tumblr; 1) establish by claim, and under penalty of perjury, that you are the copyright owner; or 2) establish by claim, and under penalty of perjury, that you are a proper licensee or have some other form of authority [e.g. as a co-owner of the copyright / joint owner] to use the work, which may be images, graphics, audio, video, or text, in question. On receipt of the properly completed counter-notice Yahoo / Tumblr can reinstate the work to the page without liability to themselves. BUT, you must also truthfully, and under penalty of perjury, respond in the counter-notice with your name and address so that if you are neither of those things, above, the actual copyright owner can sue you personally if they choose to do so. Giving full credit to the photographer, or even pointing to the source, does not establish in any way a right to re-use the image(s). It is still, on it's face, infringement. Studio36 QOTD "I am the law" - - - Judge Dread [and Yahoo!] Jun 17 13 05:14 am Link I do understand the photographers issue... about three years ago I started to do "street photography" which I love. I took some photos about a year ago of these security guys beating the shit out of a guy at a concert. I wanted to post these photos to Tumblr and other sites but then I thought " It will be all over the internet in 2 days and I won't get any credit" So I didn't post. Jun 17 13 05:29 am Link A quick repost of the Yahoo / Tumblr / 2257 article I mentioned SEE THIS: http://www.fastcompany.com/3009947/wher … /how-adult How Adult Tumblrs Could Land Yahoo In A Legal Pinch Marissa Mayer says she wants to "let Tumblr be Tumblr" after acquiring David Karp's microblogging service for $1.1 billion. But the bigger problem for Yahoo might be porn pages that don't reveal enough. --- [in part] Tumblr porn rebloggers often use stolen or unsourced material. And they generally do not include legally compliant 2257 statements in the sidebars of their Tumblrs; more to the point, they are pretty much incapable of doing so, as it's generally hard to source a legal name and ID for an actress you don't even know the name of. David Karp's announcement Monday morning re-stated his mission to, "empower creators to make their best work and get it in front of the audience they deserve" (italics his). But most people who upload or post porn on Tumblr aren't creators at all--they're "curators" at best, and thieves at worst. --- My comment: Most bloggers are not and will never be "curators" [someone who manages an organised collection] so the only alternative is to call them what they really are - - - thieves. Studio36 Jun 17 13 05:35 am Link I love the first amendment... but anyone can get on Tumblr and view extreme porn ( kids included) and see the "worst of the worst" on Tumblr Going on a pay site and viewing this crap is fine... Let's protect the kids, when they become adults they will have the rest of there lives to be miserable... Jun 17 13 05:50 am Link veypurr wrote: Anyone can get on MM too. Let's burn 'em all, right? Jun 17 13 05:55 am Link studio36uk wrote: These things I find odd. Spend a billion, then express you're seriously concerned. Is that like the cart before the horse? Jun 17 13 05:57 am Link Cherrystone wrote: Take care of your kids, not everyone does the same. Taking care of the worlds kids is EVERYONE'S responsibility.. Jun 17 13 06:09 am Link veypurr wrote: Or they can just skip tumblr and use any search engine to view the same. Or they can view or read all sorts of extreme material in literature or from the history of art that is available without age limitation at libraries and bookstores. Or they can obsess about the grimier parts of the Bible with all it's murders, kidnappings and rapes. Or they can just skip it entirely because, for the most part they're not interested. Jun 17 13 06:27 am Link veypurr wrote: That 'not everyone does the same' doesn't fall into my lap, nor should it be done in a manner that infringes upon others. Jun 17 13 06:39 am Link Jeffrey M Fletcher wrote: ^^^True Jun 17 13 06:40 am Link With all due respect, I have no issues with the discussion taking place, but ... what does this all have to do with the OP's question? It sounds as if he sent a takedown notice to Tumblr, and as of yet, they have not complied. Jun 17 13 08:10 am Link GPS Studio Services wrote: Well, to the point then. Tumblr must act within a reasonable amount of time. What is reasonable? Typically from near real time take-downs out to ~3 to 5 days. Some sites are so large and get so many notices that it may take longer and still, for them, in their particular circumstances, be reasonable. Jun 17 13 12:35 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: studio36uk wrote: I agree, it would be helpful though to know if he sent a properly formatted DMCA takedown notice. It would be helpful to know if he sent it as a model or as the copyright holder. Jun 17 13 12:37 pm Link 1-5 days. typically. Jun 17 13 12:37 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: GPS Studio Services wrote: I agree, it would be helpful though to know if he sent a properly formatted DMCA takedown notice. It would be helpful to know if he sent it as a model or as the copyright holder. That too. Tumblr no longer accepts "Im the model and I dont want this porn blog using my photo" as a reason to pull your photo, like it used to. You have to get the copyright holder to file a proper DMCA Jun 17 13 12:39 pm Link I've sent a tumblr one before and they were really quick in responding (2 days) and removing the images. Jun 17 13 12:44 pm Link pretty quick Jun 17 13 12:46 pm Link Laura UnBound wrote: Actually there may be some workable alternatives for models as well, but NOT by using a DMCA notice. And in those alternative routes there is no compulsion for a site to do anything, but usually depending on their ToS they may do. Jun 17 13 01:19 pm Link studio36uk wrote: The last time I sent a request for an image to be removed I was told to have the photographer send a DMCA. Ive sent in dozens of "Im the model and I know they dont have permission for this" notices, not through the DMCA route. Unless I was told something incorrect, theyve stopped accepting that. Jun 17 13 01:24 pm Link Tumblr has as choice of law the laws of NY state. That leaves some room to fashion a complaint under NY Civil Rights law, Article 5, Sections 50 and 51 among other possibilities. Presumably the Tumblr user who owns / runs / administers the blog does not have your WRITTEN consent, or your consent at all, and in fact you are explicitly denying that to them. If they've lifted your image from somewhere else without the photographer's consent that is infringement of the photographer's rights, and that part of the issue is nothing to do with your complaint. Objectively, you will be seeking a take down following the Communications Decency Act [CDA] 47 USC §230 using the NY law as the basis. Studio36 Jun 17 13 04:22 pm Link veypurr wrote: Fuck that, i spent years responsibly avoiding the need to take responsibility of kids, you made em, you take care of em. Jun 17 13 04:29 pm Link My experience with DMCA's and Tumblr is 1-2 days (more typically 1). This probably won't make me that popular with some of you on here, but frankly, if Yahoo is shutting down some of the porn sites masquerading as tumblr sites - I'm all for it. There is no way any pay site could possibly contain anything more hardcore than some of the stuff I've seen on some tumblr sites (and usually, the harder core they are, it seems the more guilty they are of stealing images from others). Frankly, I don't see how any pay sites these days make enough money to even pay the monthly hosting charges. Some of the tumblr sites (as well as other free sites) show anything a person can possibly imagine! Jun 17 13 04:38 pm Link studio36uk wrote: What part of 47 USC §230 do you think requires Tumblr to take down an image based on an allegation related to NY CRC 50/51? What part of 47 USC §230 authorizes it? Jun 17 13 05:00 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: 230 authorises a take down for nearly any reason, perhaps no explicitly stated reason at all, either on the part of the ISP itself if they stumble across something on their own, or on complaint. 230 gives them immunity from civil claims. This can be directed specifically to, and implemented by, violations of their ToS or AUP. 47 USC 230(c)(2) and 230(c)(2)(A) NY 50 and 51, on the other hand serves to support a reason why they should in the course of a complaint. Jun 17 13 05:44 pm Link I agree that they may not be liable, but since it is their policy to not respond to model requests, I don't see how this has anything to do with anything. The section you are citing deals primarily with obscenity. It makes no mention, whatsoever about the right to publicity. So all it says is that, if they take the image down, they may well have no liability. It makes no suggestion that they should take it down. Jun 17 13 05:59 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: My view is that they fail to respond to a model's complaint at their own peril. They may not, in the end, take the stuff down, and they are not compelled to do so, but they can not simply ignore the complaint out of hand. Jun 17 13 06:06 pm Link canada's data protection law?????????????????????????????????????????? by that logic anyone could sue Facebook if their name or image appeared without their prior consent. lollery Jun 17 13 06:09 pm Link AVD AlphaDuctions wrote: Provincial not national Jun 17 13 06:13 pm Link studio36uk wrote: even more lollerous Jun 17 13 06:21 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: studio36uk wrote: There is only one big hold in your logic. 47 USC §230 specifically holds that the hosting service is not considered the publisher. It absolves them of liability. This is not a safe harbor statute as the DMCA is. Jun 17 13 07:40 pm Link Im not a canadian. Just throwing that out there. Jun 17 13 08:30 pm Link I filed a DMCA takedown notice against someone who reblogged one of my photos and added a spam link today. Within 5 minutes, I got an automated notice of infringement against myself. Ten minutes later, the original photo was deleted off my tumblr. But hey, the spam reblogger's tumblr account was deleted. Frustrating. Filed a request to have my photo reinstated. Hour later, no response. Jun 23 13 04:02 pm Link |
