# \[Techdirt\] False DMCA Takedowns Can Create Liability

**URL:** <https://sellersasksellers.com/t/techdirt-false-dmca-takedowns-can-create-liability/4089>\
**Category:** News for Ecomm Sellers\
**Tags:** intellectual-propert, copyright, dmca\
**Created:** [May 22, 2024, 9:32pm UTC](https://sellersasksellers.com/t/techdirt-false-dmca-takedowns-can-create-liability/4089 "2024-05-22T21:32:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![packetfire](https://sellersasksellers.com/user_avatar/sellersasksellers.com/packetfire/32/4111_2.png) [@packetfire](https://sellersasksellers.com/u/packetfire)\
**Post date:** [May 22, 2024, 9:32pm UTC](https://sellersasksellers.com/t/techdirt-false-dmca-takedowns-can-create-liability/4089/1 "2024-05-22T21:32:01Z")

</div>

The article is worth a read, as it is a good example of how an attempt to intimidate a merchant of goods backfired on the bully.

> **[When ‘Lol, No’ Is Not Enough: Lawyer Explains Why Bogus Takedown Over ■■■■■...](https://www.techdirt.com/2024/05/14/when-lol-no-is-not-enough-lawyer-explains-why-bogus-takedown-over-fuck-the-lapd-shirt-should-result-in-paying-legal-fees/)**
>
> You may recall last month’s hilarious story of lawyer Mike Dunford’s response to a vexatious angry demand letter from IMG, representing the LAPD Foundation, claiming that a t-shirt with the followi…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![papy](https://sellersasksellers.com/user_avatar/sellersasksellers.com/papy/32/7639_2.png) [@papy](https://sellersasksellers.com/u/papy)\
**Post date:** [May 23, 2024, 3:04am UTC](https://sellersasksellers.com/t/techdirt-false-dmca-takedowns-can-create-liability/4089/2 "2024-05-23T03:04:54Z")

</div>

🔥 Somebody get those bullies some sunscreen! 🤣

The point that Cola’s lawyer makes–that the “C” in DMCA stands for “copyright,” but that there was no actual copyright at issue–is probably explained best by this:

> [@](#):
>
> _It seems clear that Schmidt was either lazy… or (more likely) was hoping that because “DMCA takedowns” are so widely known as a concept, that simply calling his document as such would lead an unsophisticated individual at Cola Corporation to get scared and fold._
> 
> _Dunford further makes it clear that the format of the letter “mirrors the requirements” of an official DMCA takedown notice, to effectively argue that even if it wasn’t officially a “DMCA takedown notice,” it was substantially close enough that Cola Corporation might actually have a legitimate 512(f) claim._
> 
> _Now, if you’ve followed Techdirt for any length of time, you probably know that DMCA 512(f) claims for filing a misleading DMCA takedown claim are nearly impossible to win for a variety of (mostly stupid) reasons. But, damn, if this weren’t a case where it’s pretty clear that, not only was IMG misrepresenting stuff, but that they knew full well they were misrepresenting stuff. And that means that it’s a situation where a 512(f) claim might actually be legit._

Sellers must educate themselves so as not to be some bully’s “unsophisticated individual”.

Great read, thanks @packetfire !

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://sellersasksellers.com/uploads/default/original/2X/a/a4c9a465996187fefc1926a322b0daaa0b4ea9d8.png) [@system](https://sellersasksellers.com/u/system)\
**Post date:** [August 21, 2024, 3:05am UTC](https://sellersasksellers.com/t/techdirt-false-dmca-takedowns-can-create-liability/4089/3 "2024-08-21T03:05:06Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.