[Natsu]

There are a few other formalities that can trip you up, like having a registered DMCA contact. If you're going into a business like this, you probably want to get a lawyer to explain it all to you. There are just too many gotchas out there and you'll be a magnet for legal threats.

EDIT: Also, it's "safe harbor" not "fair use"--the article gets it wrong. One more reason to have a lawyer explain your obligations to you before you get into something like this.

[mjn]

Fwiw, it's also possible for any third party to check if you've complied with that particular formality, since the U.S. Copyright Office provides a directory of all companies that have registered a DMCA agent: http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/a_agents.html

[Natsu]

One thing that really stands out is how many people don't appear to comply with that. The big sites seem to, but not too many others.

[dpe82]

Which is bad, because without registering an agent, you have NO safe harbor protection.

[AnthonyMouse]

The interesting thing is that what happens without the safe harbor is not a known quantity. The safe harbor is like immunity, but lack of immunity isn't the same as liability. But in order to find out, somebody has to take it to court, and the entities small enough to have not registered a DMCA agent will tend to settle or be bankrupted by the litigation costs before the issue makes it to an appellate court.

[Natsu]

Yeah, it's not something we're likely to see put to the test, as if you can afford the legal bills to fight a copyright action in federal court, you surely can afford the small filing fee to register a DMCA contact in the first place in order to fend off the likelihood of much larger fees later.