[cobbzilla]

Honestly wondering if this is a legit use of DMCA. Like, what exact provision of the DMCA is being implicated here?

One should have some reasonable means for challenging this kind of thing. But what do I know.

It’s a scary world when you know a C&D or other legal nastygram is 100% bullshit and want to ignore it, but you’re chained to a vendor that can’t respond with any level of subtlety, just the ban-hammer for everyone

So the C&Ds and nastygrams become increasingly ridiculous, but whatevs, they’re all rubber-stamped so hey corporate just push that red “lawyer” button and make my embarrassment go away real fast, before any Streisand effect can kick in!

[kevincox]

IANAL but it absolutely isn't.

DMCA is for copyright violations. They aren't providing any copyright protected information in the post. The nearest thing would probably be screenshots of their internal applications which seems to be to be obviously fair use.

[charcircuit]

The article did show images of the internal website including a one showing a photograph. It infringes their copyright, but it would be up to the author to prove that the usage was fair use.