Uploaded July 2008 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Renetto suggested that we should file a class action lawsuit against a large corporation that gets our videos suspended when it files unjustifiable DMCAs. Viacom was sued by the EFF in February 2007 when it sent out 100,000 DMCAs. Some of those DMCAs targeted videos that had no Viacom material in them whatsoever, and other DMCAs took down videos that made Fair Use of clips from Viacom's videos. The Viacom dragnet was responsible for getting LiberalViewer's account unjustly suspended.
themaskedanalyst.com/LiberalViewer.htm
The Electronic Frontier Foundation responded bys suing Viacom. The upshot of the lawsuit was an agreement by Viacom to recognize Fair Use and to pledge to be more careful in sending out DMCAs in the future.
themaskedanalyst.com/Viacom%20Dragnet.htm
Alphacat was suspended due to a bogus DMCA from Televisa San Angel, a Mexican broadcasting company:
youtube.com/watch?v=wCp-Coghhrk
He filed a DMCA counter notice and he should get his channel back soon.
youtube.com/watch?v=cILNzPj84Wc
According to Alphacat, Youtube insiders have told him that Televisa San Angel has been responsible for many DMCA notices. I am guessing the vast majority of those notices are legitimate, but they do seem to issue false ones from time to time. Seanbedlam had a video of his DMCAd. If you look at the comments section of his video you will see that he too was targeted by Televisa San Angel.
youtube.com/watch?v=aKSZ0DaoHJM
So Televisa San Angel would be a logical candidate for a class action suit. But the class action suit misses the point—the main threat from the DMCA comes not from legitimate corporations trying to protect their copyright. The main threat comes from the DMCA itself and from Youtube's overzealous interpretation of it, as well as from trolls who are willing to use the DMCA to get the docs of their enemies.
The following video, "YouTube's DMCA Loophole", by VoicesintheHead (previously known as supexcellency), may be the most important video on Youtube. WATCH IT! THEN READ THE COMMENTS POSTED ON IT!!!
youtube.com/watch?v=qAYLBro5QVM
Read the letter from Rozeboosje that he posted in the sidebar to his video:
youtube.com/watch?v=9cvBxvpAJjw
Now, in order for Youtube to enjoy the protection against copyright lawsuits granted by the DMCA, the DMCA demands that Youtube turn over any counter notice it receives to the person who filed a DMCA complaint. And the DMCA mandates that in order to file a counter notice, you must sign your name to it and provide your address and phone as well. So the DMCA mandates that Youtube turn your docs over to whoever files a DMCA against you—even if they are a whacko stalker who filed a false DMCA in order to get your information to kill you.
This requirement by the DMCA is clearly unconstitutional.
themaskedanalyst.com/The%20DMCA%20is%20Uncontstitutional.htm
A class action lawsuit will not affect this problem. The law needs to be changed so that we can file counter notices while remaining anonymous. We need thousands of people on board in order to have a chance of bringing about that change. The only way that will happen is if BIG Youtubers like Smosh, Michael Buckley (Whatthebuck), Sxephil, Venetian Princess, Cory (Mr. Safety) Williams, and Lisa Nova get on board. I hope that Renetto will use his contacts to try to get them to join the cause.
Once a critical mass has been achieved, then we can bombard John McCain's channel with videos asking for change and bombard Barack Obama's inbox with letters asking for change.
It will take months, perhaps years, before the law is changed. In the meantime, after we get a critical mass we should bombard Youtube with letters asking them to change the way they implement their policy. They should redact (cross out) our identifying information when turning counter notices over to the person who has filed a complaint against us. They should turn over that information only after:
1) A court subpoenas Youtube for the information.
2) Youtube forwards the subpoena to the person who filed the counter notice. This give us an opportunity to quash the subpoeona.
3) Youtube should turn over the identifying information only if the person filing the counter notice does not file a motion to quash a subpoena or if a Court refuses to grant the motion to quash.
This procedure will protect Youtube users from having to turn their documents over to psychotic stalkers. It will enable us to preserve our anonymity unless a Court determines there is a reasonable chance that we will lose a copyright lawsuit.
Renetto suggested that we should file a class action lawsuit against a large corporation that gets our videos suspended when it files unjustifiable DMCAs. Viacom was sued by the EFF in February 2007 when it sent out 100,000 DMCAs. Some of those DMCAs targeted videos that had no Viacom material in them whatsoever, and other DMCAs took down videos that made Fair Use of clips from Viacom's videos. The Viacom dragnet was responsible for getting LiberalViewer's account unjustly suspended.
themaskedanalyst.com/LiberalViewer.htm
The Electronic Frontier Foundation responded bys suing Viacom. The upshot of the lawsuit was an agreement by Viacom to recognize Fair Use and to pledge to be more careful in sending out DMCAs in the future.
themaskedanalyst.com/Viacom%20Dragnet.htm
Alphacat was suspended due to a bogus DMCA from Televisa San Angel, a Mexican broadcasting company:
youtube.com/watch?v=wCp-Coghhrk
He filed a DMCA counter notice and he should get his channel back soon.
youtube.com/watch?v=cILNzPj84Wc
According to Alphacat, Youtube insiders have told him that Televisa San Angel has been responsible for many DMCA notices. I am guessing the vast majority of those notices are legitimate, but they do seem to issue false ones from time to time. Seanbedlam had a video of his DMCAd. If you look at the comments section of his video you will see that he too was targeted by Televisa San Angel.
youtube.com/watch?v=aKSZ0DaoHJM
So Televisa San Angel would be a logical candidate for a class action suit. But the class action suit misses the point—the main threat from the DMCA comes not from legitimate corporations trying to protect their copyright. The main threat comes from the DMCA itself and from Youtube's overzealous interpretation of it, as well as from trolls who are willing to use the DMCA to get the docs of their enemies.
The following video, "YouTube's DMCA Loophole", by VoicesintheHead (previously known as supexcellency), may be the most important video on Youtube. WATCH IT! THEN READ THE COMMENTS POSTED ON IT!!!
youtube.com/watch?v=qAYLBro5QVM
Read the letter from Rozeboosje that he posted in the sidebar to his video:
youtube.com/watch?v=9cvBxvpAJjw
Now, in order for Youtube to enjoy the protection against copyright lawsuits granted by the DMCA, the DMCA demands that Youtube turn over any counter notice it receives to the person who filed a DMCA complaint. And the DMCA mandates that in order to file a counter notice, you must sign your name to it and provide your address and phone as well. So the DMCA mandates that Youtube turn your docs over to whoever files a DMCA against you—even if they are a whacko stalker who filed a false DMCA in order to get your information to kill you.
This requirement by the DMCA is clearly unconstitutional.
themaskedanalyst.com/The%20DMCA%20is%20Uncontstitutional.htm
A class action lawsuit will not affect this problem. The law needs to be changed so that we can file counter notices while remaining anonymous. We need thousands of people on board in order to have a chance of bringing about that change. The only way that will happen is if BIG Youtubers like Smosh, Michael Buckley (Whatthebuck), Sxephil, Venetian Princess, Cory (Mr. Safety) Williams, and Lisa Nova get on board. I hope that Renetto will use his contacts to try to get them to join the cause.
Once a critical mass has been achieved, then we can bombard John McCain's channel with videos asking for change and bombard Barack Obama's inbox with letters asking for change.
It will take months, perhaps years, before the law is changed. In the meantime, after we get a critical mass we should bombard Youtube with letters asking them to change the way they implement their policy. They should redact (cross out) our identifying information when turning counter notices over to the person who has filed a complaint against us. They should turn over that information only after:
1) A court subpoenas Youtube for the information.
2) Youtube forwards the subpoena to the person who filed the counter notice. This give us an opportunity to quash the subpoeona.
3) Youtube should turn over the identifying information only if the person filing the counter notice does not file a motion to quash a subpoena or if a Court refuses to grant the motion to quash.
This procedure will protect Youtube users from having to turn their documents over to psychotic stalkers. It will enable us to preserve our anonymity unless a Court determines there is a reasonable chance that we will lose a copyright lawsuit.
