The posts on Threads that include a screenshot of the article are showing as Content Not Available for me, just FYI — could just be Threads Threadsing, or this joker could be filing DMCAs with Meta.
Out of curiosity, I tried to find the address given by said "lawyer". I haven't managed to find it on Bing Maps or Google Maps. Which is interesting...
It's also very, very easy to check that there are no Michael Woods practicing as lawyers in Los Angeles. He didn't represent himself as such necessarily, but that email address...
As the copyright holder, if you choose to authorize it I'm sure that there are many people who would be willing to mirror that content - with the additional saga, if you like...
Technically you only if you're not 100% sure the content is legal.
Skipping the takedown and counterclaim step means *this* safe harbor law doesn't protect you from copyright lawsuit for *that* material. It doesn't create new liability. If it's legal you can get a potential lawsuit dismissed
If you're not sure, then letting the uploader go through counter claim will shift liability from host to the user while keeping the material up. In this case host and user is the same person so that step makes no difference
Comments
https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/LicenseeSearch/QuickSearch?FreeText=Michael+woods&SoundsLike=false
Seems to be a case of the threaditis.
But that's probably why you used quotes and responded starting with the word "If."
and grammar lifted from a Nigerian prince email.
Donate his money to charity.
When he complains, "LOL u got rugged, son!"
:P
but in that case wouldn’t it still put the burden to act on the party that sent the original DMCA notice?
since you’re the host it might seem silly but i think it’s still part of the process
idk the whole thing seems ridiculous
Skipping the takedown and counterclaim step means *this* safe harbor law doesn't protect you from copyright lawsuit for *that* material. It doesn't create new liability. If it's legal you can get a potential lawsuit dismissed