DMCA (copyright) take down notice from Sonarworks (edit, issue solved by Sonarworks)

[mansr]

I think Dave showed data from 3 independent studies on how much you lose cutting out the individuals ears.

What headphones did Vincent van Gogh use?

 

[SIY]

What headphones did Vincent van Gogh use?

 

[scott wurcer]

View attachment 48618

Never mind the Bollocks you got the wrong one.

 

[Tks]

DMCA...

My God, this has got to be right up there with some of the most despicable garbage along with things like the Patriot Act, and friends.

I cannot properly articulate the words to demonstrate my disdain for laws like it. And a whole industry it has bred that only serves as a headache to nearly everyone. This is a plague on Youtube especially like you wouldn't believe.

We all know by now who patent trolls are. Now we have takedown notice trolls...

Speaking of which, any thoughts on joining Youtube bossman? Recall you were thinking about it at one point. (runs away)

 

[DownUnderGazza]

It’s funny, copyright was introduced into English common law in the Victorian era precisely to prevent this troll like behaviour. In the US and to a degree the U.K. the state has been coopted by Disney et al to strangle commercial competition. I have no idea what sonar works think they are achieving by this as they are hardly consequential players in the copyright world, but they have successfully failed in front of the entire internet.

Scroll back a bit and you’ll see that SonarWorks are investigating

 

[MartinsV]

Hey all,

TL;DR - the DMCA take-down notice was sent out by our 3rd party service provider in error and will be retracted as soon as Google processes it. ASR is now whitelisted and this should not happen again.

Long version: I investigated this issue and found out that our service provider (SP) did in fact sent this notice on behalf of Sonarworks. I contacted the SP, and they responded that this should not have happened and is currently investigated. It was possibly a human error, but there's no confirmation yet.

We use the service only to scan for pirated content - torrents, cracks, keygens - because it directly impacts our business.
We do not use the service or any other means to take action against articles, reviews, forum posts, blog posts or any other entries that merely discusses, reviews, critiques or posts information/screenshots/videos of our software.

So this should not have happened, and I apologize on behalf of Sonarworks that this has happened.

Our SP has submitted a retraction to Google regarding this notice. It will be processed by Google within 3-7 business days. There's an additional 10 day legal waiting period - as far as I understand, it can be used for counter-claims. Furthermore, the SP will investigate how this happened and make sure it doesn't repeat in the future.

I hope I have cleared the air on this unfortunate matter. Let me know if there's anything left unanswered!

Also, I sent an apology to Amir regarding the lack of response to the original message addressed to Sonarworks. The message got stuck in the pipe-line, which should never happen. I've raised the issue with my colleagues so we can avoid such issues in the future.

 

[anmpr1]

I try and be judicious in my replies, as I often posts pics and graphs. One on-line hi-fi Webzine posts measurements from Bascom King. I was going to post a couple of his graphs but noted that the site has a warning that everything is copyrighted. I understand wanting to protect one's journalistic and professional work, so in that case I just posted a link.

Back in the day Bose Corporation was known for taking reviewers to court over published opinions about their unusual speakers. This was all pre-Internet. The problem in First Amendment and 'fair use' cases is that it's tough to fight a large company as litigation is expensive, even if you are in the right.

I'm glad this situation has been resolved fairly.

 

[DonH56]

Hey all,

TL;DR - the DMCA take-down notice was sent out by our 3rd party service provider in error and will be retracted as soon as Google processes it. ASR is now whitelisted and this should not happen again.

Long version: I investigated this issue and found out that our service provider (SP) did in fact sent this notice on behalf of Sonarworks. I contacted the SP, and they responded that this should not have happened and is currently investigated. It was possibly a human error, but there's no confirmation yet.

We use the service only to scan for pirated content - torrents, cracks, keygens - because it directly impacts our business.
We do not use the service or any other means to take action against articles, reviews, forum posts, blog posts or any other entries that merely discusses, reviews, critiques or posts information/screenshots/videos of our software.

So this should not have happened, and I apologize on behalf of Sonarworks that this has happened.

Our SP has submitted a retraction to Google regarding this notice. It will be processed by Google within 3-7 business days. There's an additional 10 day legal waiting period - as far as I understand, it can be used for counter-claims. Furthermore, the SP will investigate how this happened and make sure it doesn't repeat in the future.

I hope I have cleared the air on this unfortunate matter. Let me know if there's anything left unanswered!

Also, I sent an apology to Amir regarding the lack of response to the original message addressed to Sonarworks. The message got stuck in the pipe-line, which should never happen. I've raised the issue with my colleagues so we can avoid such issues in the future.

Classy!

 

[Phorize]

Hey all,

TL;DR - the DMCA take-down notice was sent out by our 3rd party service provider in error and will be retracted as soon as Google processes it. ASR is now whitelisted and this should not happen again.

Long version: I investigated this issue and found out that our service provider (SP) did in fact sent this notice on behalf of Sonarworks. I contacted the SP, and they responded that this should not have happened and is currently investigated. It was possibly a human error, but there's no confirmation yet.

We use the service only to scan for pirated content - torrents, cracks, keygens - because it directly impacts our business.
We do not use the service or any other means to take action against articles, reviews, forum posts, blog posts or any other entries that merely discusses, reviews, critiques or posts information/screenshots/videos of our software.

So this should not have happened, and I apologize on behalf of Sonarworks that this has happened.

Our SP has submitted a retraction to Google regarding this notice. It will be processed by Google within 3-7 business days. There's an additional 10 day legal waiting period - as far as I understand, it can be used for counter-claims. Furthermore, the SP will investigate how this happened and make sure it doesn't repeat in the future.

I hope I have cleared the air on this unfortunate matter. Let me know if there's anything left unanswered!

Also, I sent an apology to Amir regarding the lack of response to the original message addressed to Sonarworks. The message got stuck in the pipe-line, which should never happen. I've raised the issue with my colleagues so we can avoid such issues in the future.

Apologies for my rush to judgement above, I’ll delete the post.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

This thread should be deleted. Or the original post modified to clearly state what true situation.

 

[ta240]

DMCA seems like the classic situation where a good idea runs amok.

Allowing people to protect their images, artwork or other creations from being stolen, distributed and resold without their benefit is a good thing. But once profit gets involved in going after the violations it spins out of control.

 

[ta240]

This thread should be deleted. Or the original post modified to clearly state what true situation.

I'm curious in situations like this how many people make it far enough into the thread to see the change in the story.

 

[Thomas savage]

Hey all,

TL;DR - the DMCA take-down notice was sent out by our 3rd party service provider in error and will be retracted as soon as Google processes it. ASR is now whitelisted and this should not happen again.

Long version: I investigated this issue and found out that our service provider (SP) did in fact sent this notice on behalf of Sonarworks. I contacted the SP, and they responded that this should not have happened and is currently investigated. It was possibly a human error, but there's no confirmation yet.

We use the service only to scan for pirated content - torrents, cracks, keygens - because it directly impacts our business.
We do not use the service or any other means to take action against articles, reviews, forum posts, blog posts or any other entries that merely discusses, reviews, critiques or posts information/screenshots/videos of our software.

So this should not have happened, and I apologize on behalf of Sonarworks that this has happened.

Our SP has submitted a retraction to Google regarding this notice. It will be processed by Google within 3-7 business days. There's an additional 10 day legal waiting period - as far as I understand, it can be used for counter-claims. Furthermore, the SP will investigate how this happened and make sure it doesn't repeat in the future.

I hope I have cleared the air on this unfortunate matter. Let me know if there's anything left unanswered!

Also, I sent an apology to Amir regarding the lack of response to the original message addressed to Sonarworks. The message got stuck in the pipe-line, which should never happen. I've raised the issue with my colleagues so we can avoid such issues in the future.

No you definitely want to hold @amirm emails in the ' pipe line ' just ask the AP and Klippel folks ..

 

[direstraitsfan98]

I'm curious in situations like this how many people make it far enough into the thread to see the change in the story.

Exactly what worries me. But Amir has modified the thread title so nothing more to complain about.

 

[StevenEleven]

It was a classy apology, but I’m not really satisfied as to either the kindergarten product concept (IMHO), or their “caught in the pipeline” plus “mistake of a third-party service-provider“ excuse/explanation. Too much going wrong for me to let it go in my mind. That’s enough to reflect poorly on the management of the company, and words won’t wash it away. What are the odds that @amirm was the first to experience this mistreatment? Is it possible their modus operandi was previously just to blow people off who complained? It would fit the sequence of events here, would it not? What a coincidence they became so responsive once @amirm used the power of this public platform! I do believe they have learned some things about themselves though.

Very Sincerely,

Not Buyin‘ It (literally)

 

[restorer-john]

Not Buyin‘ It (literally)

I don't think that's fair.

It's a relatively obscure piece of software, just as "the power of this public forum" is also dubious in its influence. A bunch of geeks jumping up and down does not an earthquake make.

The response has been timely, contrite and shows considerable investigation has been undertaken to ensure it doesn't happen again.

 

[StevenEleven]

I don't think that's fair.

It's a relatively obscure piece of software, just as "the power of this public forum" is also dubious in its influence. A bunch of geeks jumping up and down does not an earthquake make.

The response has been timely, contrite and shows considerable investigation has been undertaken to ensure it doesn't happen again.

I disagree, but I am glad to see both points of view represented. So thank you.

 

[mansr]

It was a classy apology, but I’m not really satisfied as to either the kindergarten product concept (IMHO), or their “caught in the pipeline” plus “mistake of a third-party service-provider“ excuse/explanation.

DMCA takedown services are notoriously overzealous. Sometimes they even flag official websites as infringing. I have no trouble believing this explanation. As for the lost emails, such things happen. They responded with a public apology. That's good enough for me.

 

[pozz]

@MartinsV Thank you for responding personally.

 

[scott wurcer]

I disagree, but I am glad to see both points of view represented. So thank you.

I hear you, there are two issues here the unfortunate mix up and what is actually being sold. Referencing the literature I'm skeptical but in this case we shall see.