Source: https://www.sfwa.org/2013/03/the-dmca-takedown-notice-demystified/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 11:15:27+00:00

Document:
As usual, note that although I am a lawyer, the following is offered for education and information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult a copyright lawyer for your individual circumstances.
Also, in the following discussion, I refrain from commenting on whether the DMCA takedown notice process implements wise policy. I describe the law as it is, not as it ought to be (or I wish it to be).
The so-called “DMCA take down notice” is a creature of Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”). It added Section 512 to Title 17 of the United States Code (Copyright), which basically exempts certain online service providers (“OSPs” or sometimes “ISPs”) from liability for copyright infringing acts by its users, provided it meets certain conditions (such as being responsive to copyright holders when given notice of infringement on the network the OSP controls).
The definition of an OSP for purposes of the DMCA is quite broad: “a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities therefor.” 17 USC §512(k)(1)(B). This would include most sites that offer user-generated content such as web hosting companies, blogging platforms (LiveJournal, Blogger, Tumblr), discussion forums, and so on.
It is the notification referred to in (3) above that has become known as the “DMCA takedown notice.” In brief, when an OSP receives such a notice from a copyright holder, it is required to remove or disable access to the accused material in order to avoid being held liable itself.
So if I find someone stealing my story and posting it on their blog, I can just get the blog hosting company to take it down? Why would they act against their customer to help me?
The OSP is incentivized to take down material that is claimed to be infringing in two ways.
First, complying with your request shields it from being held as a contributory or vicarious infringer if you’re right about your claim.
Second, the DMCA also shields the OSP from liability to its customer if the material is held ultimately not to be infringing. 17 USC §512(g)(1) (“a service provider shall not be liable to any person for any claim based on the service provider’s good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material … regardless of whether the material or activity is ultimately determined to be infringing”).
So, yes, they will listen to you (but see more on overseas sites below).
This sounds like a really good way to get rid of pirates.
Compared to the normal legal process for getting an injunction to remove an infringing copy from the network, which takes a long time and an enormous amount of resources, a DMCA takedown notice is fast, simple, and can be drawn up by a copyright holder without the help of a lawyer. It really is very powerful.
Moreover, you can issue takedown notices not only for the infringing material itself, but also “information location tools” pointing to the material—including “directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link.” 17 USC §512(d).
However, note that many dedicated piracy sites are hosted overseas, outside the reach of US law enforcement. In such cases, a DMCA takedown notice is likely to be ignored.
So what does a takedown notice look like?
Where do I send this notice?
When you find that someone has infringed your copyright, you can go to this directory to find out where to send your takedown notice (they all have email addresses).
If the offending page is on a hosted blog like LiveJournal or Blogger, finding the right OSP is relatively easy. Sometimes, when the infringer is running a stand-alone web site, you’ll need to find the hosting company by conducting a WHOIS query or other similar technical investigation.
But what if I publish a parody or quote from a work as part of a fandom analysis? Aren’t those uses protected? Can the unhappy copyright holder of the original issue a takedown notice to my hosting company?
Indeed, the unhappy copyright owner in your hypotheticals can do so. Putting aside whether your “parody” or “analysis” is protected—a complicated question that requires case-specific analysis to answer—the OSP will not be liable to you for taking down your work in response to a properly drafted takedown notice as long as it does so “based on facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent.” 17 USC §512(g)(1).
There are a lot of gray areas when it comes to “fair use” and related doctrines, and the OSP isn’t obligated to do much research. It can just take your page down if it looks like you’re infringing (and a parody or analysis with quotes will look like infringement).
Do I have any recourse if I know I’m not infringing?
You do. First, the DMCA provides for damages and attorney’s fees for “any person who knowingly materially misrepresents” the facts in a takedown notice. So someone who abuses the DMCA mechanism by lying to take down your page when they have absolutely no case is going to face some heavy sanctions. But “knowingly materially” is a pretty high bar to pass. Most cases of aggressive takedown notices won’t be so egregious.
In cases like the gray-area “parody” or “analysis” hypotheticals, if you, after consultation with copyright specialists, believe that you have a right to publish your allegedly infringing work, the DMCA provides for a “counter-notice” mechanism to put your page back up.
Your name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that you consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court applicable for your address and that you will accept service of process from person who issued the DMCA takedown notice (that is, you agree to be sued if it comes to that).
17 USC §512(g)(3). Note that you do not have to explain why you believe you have a right to post what you did.
After the OSP gets this counter-notice from you, it has to forward a copy of your counter-notice to the issuer of the DMCA takedown notice and inform them that the OSP will restore access to the removed material in 10 business days. And unless the DMCA issuer notified the OSP before then that they have filed an action in court seeking to restrain you from posting, the OSP must restore access to the removed material. 17 USC §512(g)(2).
Sum it up for me, please.
What a great article, Ken. I’m going to go publish it on my own website right now. Just kidding. Thanks, this was informative and clearly written. I am aleo a writer but a lawyer by training as well, and will be teaching some courses soon about art related legal topics. I will definitely encourage my students to read this.
Nice article Ken, I’m going to put a link to it from our facebook page.
Thank you very much for writing this. I suspect that I will refer people to it often.

References: §512
 §512
 §512
 §512
 §512
 §512