[kd5bjo]

The article doesn't mention anything about filing a counter-notice [1] to get her content relisted, which the law requires be processed just as blindly as the takedown. While I'm all for shedding light on abuses of the current system, the implication that she has no recourse is simply false.

In fact, I'm surprised that the widespread DMCA claim abuse hasn't spawned some quick-and-easy counter-notice services to help people get their content reinstated.

[1] http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/responding-dmca-takedown-not...

[c3o]

She does refer to this here:

> Each individual author must actively put up a fight to restore the findability of their free speech.

That's still an unacceptable system. Apart from shifting the burden of proof, you're not even notified when your pages are de-listed, so how are you supposed to know when to send such a notice?

Also, from your link:

> sending a counter-notice makes non-U.S. residents give up a powerful argument they would otherwise have -- namely, that a U.S. court does not have the authority to render a judgment against them. For these reasons, non-U.S. residents may not want to send a counter-notice

[Klathmon]

In a lot of cases the problem is that they aren't actual DMCA claims, so you lose the protections.

If they kindly ask a company to take it down, you have no recourse, and they have no risk.

[colejohnson66]

The problem with takedowns (at least on) YouTube (for example) is that ContentID is not DMCA