My hosting company (hostgator) received a DMCA complaint against one of my websites selling physical products. They (hostgator) sent me an email through their support system (which I don't receive the emails form their support system) stating I needed to fix the issue & they yanked the website - it now returns a 403 error. I guess it got yanked on or about the 9th of this month. Net enforcers did not inform me of my alleged infringment: they went straight to my web hosting company. What I'm wondering is if anyone has dealt with net enforcers lately. There isn't much that comes up in search engines & there is only 1 posting in this forum (the legal forum anyway) & it's a year old. In principal, I'm ticked. It seems that net enforcers has a history of spitting out unsubstantiated infringement claims. . . but I'm not out that much money, and I can't at this point in time justify much in legal costs just over principal. I might be willing to spend a little, but I don't think anything less than $10,000 would get me any results in rectifying this foolishness. I guess the question is: is there anyone else dealing with net enforcers or is there an active lawsuit that I can hop on? It's not the money, it's the fact that they send out letters to hosting companies but don't try & contact the website owner and the fact that their claims are absurd, in my opinion. If I am infrniging on Sony's intellectual rights then so is everbody that sells their Sony product on eBay with an image and description. Maybe I am wrong, though. . . maybe the millions of people selling on eBay,Yahoo,livedeal,craigslist,etc - they are all infringing on intellectual property rights when they sell an item by taking a picture of it & listing a description? Maybe I am infringing on these rights by even mentioning the companies name in print? That would be absurd. I think this whole thing is absurand and at the very least I think this would be constitutied as frivilos. My concern is not the site that got shut down, it's future websites & issues I might have with them now knowing I can squeeze out my competition by submitting a supposed violation at the net enforcers website. This means that my competition can squeeze me out of the SERPS as well if I have a hosting company that responds 'no questions asked' to every aparently unsubstantiated claim. Any input would be appreciated.
I refuse to host with idiots like that. The last, and umm... only, complaint that my hosting company received resulted in an email and a personal telephone call to me. The complaint was completely baseless, but I cleared it up immediately so as not to cause any hassle for my hosting company.
Sometimes there will be an attempt to contact the website owner, but there is no legal obligation to do so. "Everyone else doing it" isn't a legal argument or defense. There is a difference between taking you own picture of an item and using a picture you didn't take and have permission to use. I don't know exactly what they said you did. $10K doesn't get you much in a lawsuit - certainly not through a trial. Was the claim they made against you not true? That is really the key point.
I've been with hostgator for over 4 years in total now, 3+ years consecutively. This issue has caused me great concern with continuing to use them as a hosting company because this is ludicrious. They state their terms only allows them to email clients about abuse issues (not call because they can't track what was said - a weak copout) and I did ask why I didn't get a call about it. I'm not interested solely in clearing it up because that just fixes the current issue: it doesn't fix the root cause(s): warrantless accusations & webhosting companies that fold under them. I understand their (hostgators) point in not wanting to get sued by Sony, but I dont think this is the case here. I don't think I was doing anything wrong. I'm still waiting on them to forward me the entire complaint so I can have it checked out. Maybe my best course of action would be to switch hosting companies. . . and I don't like that thought at all.
I know that even if millions of other people are doing it that it isn't a legal defense - It was merely a thought: that if millions of people are doing it so openly (not like downloading copywrite protected music where they hide behind an IP address) why is this type of thing more widespread? I don't know what they said I did, either. The partial complaint which my host shared with me simply stated 1 URL and also stated that there were other places where Sony's rights were infringed upon, but they (the accusers) didn't state where else on the site the infringement was taking place; only that it was there. They also didn't state what was infringing on Sony's rights - only a URL where it was happening. I have to assume that it is the text itself, otherwise they would have linked to an image. I am legally using product descriptions/images provided by my supplier. Legally in the sense that my supplier states that I can use them, not that they are not infringing on Sony's rights. I don't know that this would legally cover me, but I am running with the assumption that I am legally using the descriptions/product images as provided and stated in my agreement with my supplier. I know that $10,000 is really nothing in a lawsuit: that was just a figure; I don't have that much disposible income to pursue principal is all & any action I took myself would likely be worthless as I couldn't follow through because I'd run out of cash. Thanks for the replies.
I hadn't posted it yet (was in the middle of posting), but according to my product supplier, who takes pictures of the products and writes the product descriptions, I can use the images - this is partially why I am confused and upset over this whole mess. I'm not using anything from a manufacturers website: the images are not theirs (only of their product) & the descriptions are paraphrased & rewritten by a 3rd party.
Until you find out the exact reason, it will be impossible to say. Giving a url could certainly mean a picture on that page, but they would have to give a specific reason in their complaint. Just because a supplier told you something, it does not mean you have legal permission to use images or copyrighted material. You need that permission directly from the copyright holder. If your supplier was wrong, you are still on the hook. You may be able to go back to the supplier who gave you incorrect information and sue them. If you can find a shared host that will promise to call you and give you the same service and product as HostGator, then you should switch. You really do need to find out the exact reason you had the complaint filed. If it was for a valid cause, they could have demanded damages and a usage fee from you without even a warning. As far as someone going out and filing false DCMA claims, yes, the filer can be sued and there are cases of six figure awards.
I doubt Sony would go through Net Enforcers. Maybe this was filed by a competative site to harm your business? From what I heard a false DMCA is an easy litigation, and proof of claim always lies with the filer in cases of dispute. This is because of the ease of filing a DMCA and the restrictions on web hosts to take immediate actions. I would not blame your hosting company, their hands are tied.
I'm having a bit of trouble getting the full complaint from my host - partly it's because I'm dealing with the abuse department & the've always been slower to respond for me than normal support. I understand that my supplier could have misled me as well. . . I'll see what it's all about once I can get my hands on the full complaint. From the way I read the partial complaint, this was filed on belaf on Sony on behalf of Net enforcers by someone else. I don't know who the someone else is - but they are apparently working on belalf of Net Enforcers & then on to Sony. I think that it might be a competitior that "turned me in" - but the site in question is really wasn't a threat to too many people. I simply had a zen cart shopping cart and promoted via Google Base. I submitted to maybe 50 directories & had 1 better ranked website pointed at it for a bit. . . with only averaging 450 unique visitors per month this year - it's not something anyone that holds an ounce of seo competence should feel threatened by. In the end, I am just selling the domain - I've just held onto it because it pays for my hosting & other online expenses every month. . . but this is an outrage to me, and I not only want to do something to stop this thing from happening to me again - but also I want to help curb this from happening to others. A year ago this would have been devistating to me. . . and I think it's unfair. However, I guess I cannot discount the idea that I am in the wrong, though out of ignorance, still it's a possibility I suppose. If I am infringing on Sony's rights and I got this slap on the wrist then I can consider myself fortunate & move on. If I'm not guilty of anything, though, I want to do something about it.
It's not just you, see: http://www.twice.com/article/CA6358440.html http://www.netenforcers.com/pdf/press_dealerscope.pdf http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=5898
Thanks for the links. A little bit disenheartening, but a relief in a way at the same time. By reading those links it leads me to believe, if this is a legit complaint, that it could be either images or text: and text for the reason that I'm not using Sony's description from their website. . . if I understood it right. I don't know - I got my host to return functionality of the website to me: but I'm still waiting on the complaint. . . I can't seem to get that from them. Thanks again for the links.
wait a minute, are you telling me that if you are doing a side by side comparison of products that include a Sony one and do not use Sony's canned marketing blurb you are going to get hit with a DMCA? Sounds like a total abuse of the system to me.
These people are complete bullies plain and simple. In their Ebay VeRO about me page they claim the right to file an intellectual property rights claim against you for making claims about an items manufacturers warranty(ie, my item is a month old and still has 11 months left on the warranty) and for selling software that you own. http://cgi3.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=net_enforcers_inc and because they're in eBay's VeRO club, eBay takes their word for it and ends your auction. They also have a 'report a violation' form right on their front page, so some scumbag ACTUAL grey market seller, you know like all the places selling only 'refurbished' or 'untested' items which really do damage brand value for example, can prevent legitimate private parties from competing with them. I'm going to war with them and I hope everyone who gets messed with by them does too. Email the PR, press, media relations, or any corporate department you can find of whatever company they're acting to abuse you on behalf of and tell them that because of this you've gone from a loyal paying customer who was using and recommending their products to one who is now actively seeking to comment negatively on them.