undefined | Better HN

0 pointspaulgb4y ago0 comments

I agree, especially considering that filing a proper false DMCA takedown requires perjuring yourself:

> A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly in-fringed.

In these situations, lawyers are renting out their credibility to bully people who can’t afford to go to court even if they’re in the right.

0 comments

phendrenad24y ago

I think that being charged with perjury is a penalty too high for lawyers as a group to accept could be a consequence of simply filing a DNCA notice on behalf of a corporation. So I doubt it'll happen. If there were a special penalty, more of a slap on the wrist, but enough to inconvenience lawyers who sign off on these bogus claims, then I think that it would be, counterintuitively, more effective.

paulgbOP4y ago

I agree, I am not saying the lawyers should be charged for perjury necessarily, just that they know the seriousness of what they're doing when they do this.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse