We absolutely want to discourage (ideally prevent) incorrect takedown requests, but correct takedown requests are a good thing. Beyond the fact that IP owners have the legal right to prevent unlicensed distribution of their IP, the only way a platform like Scribd can avoid becoming a haven for piracy is by handling takedown notices. If Scribd did not handle takedown notices and became rife with copyrighted content, they'd end up getting sued out of existence. The fact that they respect takedown notices is what keeps them immune from the lawsuits.
> That sounds like it will undermine the copyright system.
That's not a good thing.
Copyright has been abused and copyright lifetimes dramatically extended past what should be reasonable. But the fundamental goal of copyright is laudable, and the current copyright system is better than no system.
Perhaps you're confusing copyright with software patents? There are many arguments against the latter, but the arguments against software patents don't apply to the general case of copyrights.
> DMCA gives complete copyright immunity to platforms, as long as they respond to take down requests.
If a platform makes it hard to file a takedown, and easy to simply re-upload a new infringing copy of the copyrighted work, then I'm absolutely certain IP holders would sue the platform and claim that they're violating the DMCA. By providing a safe haven for piracy they'd be encouraging infringing activity on their systems, which would then cause them to fail the "red flag" test.
I don't know if the IP holders would necessarily succeed in their lawsuit, but you can bet they'd try, and surely the platform doesn't want to spend the time and effort to try and defend against that.
I am merely describing the current state of the world. There is no required automatic filtering. No required AI bots. Instead, if you want something taken down, in the USA, you have to go through a difficult process of filing a DMCA takedown notice.
Thats the currently law, and is how most of the major US platform works. Its difficult to enforce this stuff, and I like it that way.
> But the fundamental goal of copyright is laudable
Nah. Copying stuff is free. Unless someone breaks into your house, and steals a physical item, I don't care about your ownership "rights" of digital information that is free to copy.
Anything that makes it more difficult, in any way at all, to enforce laws on digital free to copy stuff, is good.
> I don't know if the IP holders would necessarily succeed in their lawsuit
They've tried and they've failed. DMCA laws are very clear cut. Send in the notice, engages in the super difficult process, and if someone reuploads it, well sucks to be you, go spend the effort to make another DMCA takedown request.
We absolutely want to discourage (ideally prevent) incorrect takedown requests, but correct takedown requests are a good thing. Beyond the fact that IP owners have the legal right to prevent unlicensed distribution of their IP, the only way a platform like Scribd can avoid becoming a haven for piracy is by handling takedown notices. If Scribd did not handle takedown notices and became rife with copyrighted content, they'd end up getting sued out of existence. The fact that they respect takedown notices is what keeps them immune from the lawsuits.