1st dmca complaint ever and they want me to remove links?

Seems very odd indeed.

I'm no legal expert but I don't see that you have broken any laws.

They could of just requested you remove the links without a dmca notice, the dmca is for copyright infringements.

I'd remove the links and break any ties with the company.

Are your links affiliate links or did you write up a negative review on this company or something?

Lee

Says it all. Really.

They got it by Google (most probably those emails/alerts in WMTools) and they want all backlinks removed.

Wanna bet?

Yeah, I can only think that the "anti-piracy" rep and the "SEO" rep (if any) of this company REALLY need to get a pow-wow together and discuss what a backlink is, and as long as the content is relevant that a backlink from any source is generally, a GOOD thing!
1) They're idiots.
2) Remove links, tell them you did so, and be done with the idiots.

LOL... The article on your website is probably outranking their own site in Google and the SEO guys are scarred that one article can do that so they are forcing you to take it down so they don't look like douches to their customer... LOL

Legally, in the U.S. at least, I don't see how someone can force you to remove links. It's your site, you can link to who you want to as long as you aren't unlawfully libeling them or intentionally bad-mouthing them by telling lies in the actual content on your site.

They can request, but I don't see why you would have to comply if you are not doing anything against the law.

Though I'd like to hear a lawyer's thoughts on that issue.

Reading that mail this is what I saw (edited):

Someone opens a store in your neighborhood: "hey buddy, would you please close your store, I'm getting less customers, thanks."

I would personally make sure I out rank the website you are linked to, then in the site write how it only cost you $5 dollars to get their.

1. This has bogus written all over it. I'd ask for a copy of the contract authorizing the person to send a DMCA notice. Just asking for the contract can be an effective way of quickly shutting down complaints.

2. This isn't a copyright issue. Just a linking complaint.

3. If I knew who they were and where they were, and evaluated how much I'd be tempted to delete the article (just to avoid any copyright issues) and keep the links!

4. Send a counter DMCA notice.

5. FYI - Attorney's fees are recoverable against someone who makes a fraudulent DMCA complaint. 17 USC Section 512(f).

.

I kinda like doing the 10,000 backlink fiverr gig. Just one will do, no need to drop $20.

Stop at a starbucks, or hotel w/ a computer in the lobby, create a quick gmail account, and drop the link report in an email.

Why? Because if it's REAL, then the guy wants YOU to clean up HIS mess, for FREE. I'd charge a $99 administrative fee for redacting content. So make an even bigger mess for him to clean up.

Or, maybe its a competitor trying to get links deleted. The backlink report w/ 10,000 links on it would be a great kick in the nuts.

In fact, I don't kinda like it, I really like.

Here's the email from my hosting company which included the dmca request I posted in the op:


We have received a Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") complaint involving domains under your control. Please note that HG has only passed on the sufficiency of the Claimant's notice, per 17 U.S.C. Sec. 512, and has not sought to determine whether the Infringing Materials on the Web Site do indeed infringe upon the Claimant's intellectual property rights.

Within a forty-eight (48) hour period, we will need you to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or we will have to disable this material to be in compliance with federal DMCA laws. A copy of the original DMCA notice is listed below our contact information.

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, your rights as a Respondent to this complaint include, but are not limited to, a possible counter-notification to us, per 17 U.S.C. Sec. 512(g)(3). We encourage you to review the federal statutory procedures for filing a counter-notification and seeking legal advice to see if taking such an action would be appropriate. Solely as an additional resource, the online form at DMCA Counter-Notification -- Chilling Effects Clearinghouse is shared for possible use in consultation with your own counsel. We cannot provide individual legal advice, and do not analyze your particular website or activity for the legality of its content.

You may send a counter-notification using postal mail or fax; email is not accepted.




So am I required to get involved in this beyond breaking the links? Also I don't want any hassle with my hosting since I have other sites there that are important and this site is pretty unimportant.

I've been getting regular article submissions to the site from various posters using the postrunner plugin. I just check that the article scores ok on readability, looks ok, add tags and post. These are article writers specifically asking me to publish the article on my site.

I just went back and checked and find this same article writer has submitted 4 separate articles that I published with links. WTF? They sought me out asked me to publish these articles they wrote and now they're coming after me?

They only mention the links in 1 article in the letter. Let me say again I could care less about the links they're simple links to a securityservicedotcom type name. They wrote the articles and they inserted the links!?

I'd be interested in a hosting providers opinion on if I need to deal with this beyond removing the links in the article. I'd especially be interested in the HG guys opinion since I know he posts here. I realize this isn't their issue at all, but would like to make sure I'm not heading for hosting trouble on my shared acct.

Also to know if this is real and are they getting letters like this for other people threatening you to remove links?

Within a forty-eight (48) hour period, we will need you to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or we will have to disable this material to be in compliance with federal DMCA laws. A copy of the original DMCA notice is listed below our contact information.

My interpretation of this statement from my hosting provider is that I have 48 hr to comply with whatever someone who sent them this email says I have to do or else my websites will be shut down.

Apparently you can write a threatening email and get people to remove whatever they say needs to be removed or your site will be shut down? Obviously if you were to argue and say no my site is fine through emails it isn't going to get resolved in 48 hrs in which case they are going to just pull the plug?

Do you mind posting what the web site is that your linking to, would be lough and games to send it though scrapebox and my 20,000 auto approve list. could push it to the 2 million list.

I kind of want to buy this person a crappy backlinks package on fiver.

I wouldn't do that if I were you. They have every right to request that links to their site be removed, particularly if they consider your site to be a "bad neighborhood" or low quality link farm.

Really a jacka$$ thing to do. They don't want links to their site on your site. Remove them and move on with your life.

Lenny is stating that if this same threat becomes a common problem with other webmasters. When you feel the hurt you too will become as concerned as he is!

If any harebrained idiot can send a spam letter to your hosting company that will threaten to disable your websites, then everyone here is could be a possible victim of fraud if this is indeed fraud. Only a lawyer can sort this out.

We have already heard from one lawyer that seemed to think it had bogus written all over it.

Lenny is giving us a warning that this could happen to any one of us. What if the warning comes and no one listens?

Looks like the OP posted the exact same letter to Traffic Planet...

...only there he left the identifying information intact.

Curiouser and curiouser.

fLufF
--

I had the same thing happen a few months ago with my directory. I got annoyed because the creep was threatening me with a DMCA when all he had to do was ask. I sent him an email saying that it wasn't a DMCA matter and made him wait a few days before I removed the links and articles.

I only have one account here. I've never posted on another account nor have I ever posted at traffic planet.

I'd never even heard of it until tonight when I pasted my letter in google to see if I could find out more. It led me to that guy getting the same thing, interesting coincidence.

Not sure I should have to prove myself innocent or how but I would assume some mod could check that I only have 1 account and even verify who i am if its that important.

I was never upset about anything and didn't care about taking the links down ( i wish I knew how to whisper online). I was simply trying to point out to everyone something that doesn't seem right to me.

I'm also concerned that this could happen to anybody, or to an important site of mine if it is this easy. Even if your right and fight it it still will cost you time and money because some guy can send an email to make $25 and cause you at the minimum some grief

This is an actual response I sent to the last defective DMCA I received. I sent the response because the source was a rights management law firm who absolutely should have known better, and I wanted to make absolutely sure that they understood that I would NOT be donating my time to comply with future defective requests. Best to nip that crap right in the bud.

While I would never suggest that you use my letter verbatim (after all, you may be dealing with a male shyster!), I will say that the firm in question never contacted me about any of the other references to the same site. Take it for what you will.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Dearest S****,

This usage is clearly and indisputably covered by fair use. Regardless, it's too much hassle to argue with a retarded lawyer, so I went ahead and removed the specific item which was identified, not because you're right, but because you're an evil bitch and I deem it best to just stay out of your way.

However your obnoxious tone has been noted. As the item in question is a snippet and a reference to the source, and is clearly understood to be fair use by pretty much the entire planet, there is nothing "clear" or "apparently willful" about any supposed "violation" in this case. I am highly offended and taking it personally that you have elected to take the moral low road and have blatantly and willfully misrepresented the facts at hand, further somehow implying that I am a thief.

If you, as a lawyer, claim that you "have a good faith belief" that a snippet and a link to an original reference "is not permissible under law", then perhaps it's time to test that "under penalty of perjury" clause in a court of law. Lying perjuring shyster, indeed.

Be advised that redacting this item wasted approximately 1 hour of my time. Due to the obnoxious tone you have chosen to take, in the future I will only comply with defective requests if I am fully compensated for any time I spend in doing so. Had you taken a more respectable tone and honest approach, and simply asked me to remove the content without the hostile threatening histrionics, you would have left me with a much more cooperative attitude in the future. However, you didn't.

Therefore, my hourly rate is $100 and my minimum billing is four hours. By electing to voluntarily contact me for any further defective requests, you will be acknowledging in writing your agreement to pay my prevailing rate for servicing your request. You will be you will be invoiced accordingly, under my standard terms which are Net 30, 2.5% monthly interest, $25 monthly late fee, Past 90 forwarded to C****** R******* S******, Inc for collection.

Here is the link to the redacted page: http://some-domain.com/some-page

I'm sending you actual text and an actual link you can actually click, and not a bitmap in a pdf, because unlike you, I'm not paranoid about someone stealing my lovingly crafted words. Feel free to share my message with all your friends, because I know I will. On facebook. On twitter. On slashdot. I do so love to share a good story, especially one featuring the "willfully perjuring wicked witch of bogus and specious legal claims".

Good day, and may we both hope and pray that we never speak again.

------

From: S**** C**** <*****@q***s*****.com>
To: me <me@aol.com>; hostmaster <hostmaster@my-host.com>; abuse <abuse@my-host.com>
Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2011 5:38 pm
Subject: DMCA takedown letter re www.some-domain.com

Please see the attached cease and desist letter.

s**** c**** | corporate counsel | q***s*****, inc. | 650.***.**** | 650.***.**** (fax)

Too bad I didn't have Kindsvater's reference back in November when I deal with that.

"Attorney's fees are recoverable against someone who makes a fraudulent DMCA complaint. 17 USC Section 512(f)."

The information on Linking at Chilling Effects looks worth reading. Read the FAQ on linking there.

That's not a valid reason to send a DMCA. Your host should know that.

Garrie

Interesting blog post. I am guessing your letter came from here:
How to send a DMCA takedown notice | Guardlex – Intelectual Property protection, DMCA services, anti piracy services

I predict Entricon to be the next person to receive a dmca letter for his post. Lol for those who haven't gotten my humor so far in this thread.

Wow, That's strange. I have never even heard of such an occurrence before. Maybe you should integrated your own posts and links in order for you website to seem less fraudulent. I mean, I have other peoples post and links on a couple of my websites also and that never happened to me before. I might be because I have a number of my own posts and links at the website as well.

Update, I sent the company an email asking for an explanation and received a reply this morning.

I think this sets a very dangerous precedent if people are willing to spam out dmca requests to have links removed. Google seems to be starting to hold weak links or links they don't like against sites. Sites want those links gone, even though they asked for them.

Some companies are offering to remove all of those links for you for a low monthly fee.

Expect a growing rash of this if something isn't done. It could waste a lot of time for all of us.

Dear Lifeshield,

I'm writing to ask if your aware of someone making dmca requests on your behalf? I was contacted by my hosting provider saying that your company filed a dmca request against my website xxxxx.com. Please verify if you are in fact responsible for the company "Guardlex" acting on your behalf in this matter. For what its worth I've removed all links to your company, but here are a few facts you should be aware of:

1. The links I was asked to remove were submitted by your company or someone acting on your behalf.

2. Articles and links were submitted via the "postrunner" system of article submissions. Do you have someone at your company submitting these articles to various websites?

3. These links and article portrayed your company in a positive light and were submitted by someone acting on your behalf.

4. The DMCA request did not ask for removal of any copyrighted material. It asked for the removal of links to your website. It did not request removal of any content.

5. This isn't a copyright issue. It's a linking complaint. A complaint about links that someone promoting your company asked for. Asking to have links removed is not a valid reason to send a dmca.

6. FYI - Attorneys fees are recoverable against someone who makes a fraudulent DMCA complaint. 17 USC Section 512 (f)

7. As I stated above, the links have been removed and I have no interest in further promoting or portraying your company in a positive light.

8. You have wasted a considerable amount of my time by first asking me to publish your content and links, then contacting my hosting service to have them removed, forcing me to find and remove the links, write multiple emails to my hosting provider and contact you. My time is very valuable.

I look forward to an immediate reply letting me know if your in fact responsible for this, why you've made this request to have links removed, if you've hired this Guardlex "company" to act on your behalf. If you aren't responsible for this I look forward to your investigating this company that's sending out improper dmca requests on your behalf.


Dear Mr. Winkle,

We do apologize that the removal of links relating to LifeShield.com have cost you valuable time.

Our VP of Online Marketing indicated the following. "Guardlex is an anti-piracy firm we hired to remove links. Google has hit us with penalties for having these links and if they are not removed we will continue to be penalized. Personally, I think the links on his sites are fine but Google does not like them."

We did appreciate your support and hope you accept our apology.

Kind regards,
Don Truax
Director of Customer Support

Isn't their email reply an admission of making a fraudulent dmca complaint?

I got a further reply:

Lenny,

Hello. I handle the interactive marketing at LifeShield. We received a penalty by Google for having 'unnatrual' links to our web site. They had cited sites like yours, among others, as specific examples for our penalty. Google SPAM team is getting more and more aggressive with its updates. You are merely being asked to remove our links that were distributed by a 3rd party. LifeShield did not distribute those articles or approve of those articles distributed to your web site. We do not plan to take any action otherwise. We hired Guardlex as a service to force removal as the Google Penalty has severely impacted our business.

Evan S. Kramer
SVP Interactive & Ecommerce

Refer Friends And Family to LifeShield And Earn FREE Service

My reply:

Evan,
I wonder, do you realize that your severely impacting other peoples business by sending out false dmca requests that claim copyright infringement? Dmca requests are not a tool for link removal. Your severely hurting my business as well as that of many others with your false claims. You've also wasted a lot of my time.

If those articles weren't distributed by your company or on your behalf, who did distribute them? You should really be looking into that as well.

You can read more about this in this discussion: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ove-links.html

I found post #21 especially relevant.

What a horrible tactic. Some data centers will charge clients up to $300 per incident to clean up DMCA complaints. Others might cut off the client because of two many claims.

False claims like this could become costly soon. I imagine lawsuits coming from this type of behavior very soon.

Just remove them and avoid any headache that could causing you some trouble with any complicated actions that you could receive from this DCMA complaint or others or even FTC.

Maybe someday I receive a complaint from DMCA or FTC that my girl friend must change her name Michelle because is copyrighted to Michelle Obama The first Lady

USA always the best

I myself consider that making others remove their links because of DMCA complaint is a great idea to prevent online piracy. Because noone has the rights to share unauthorized files in the internet without legal permission from the producers.

hello - methinks this is obvious. 1)Find a few thousand links on obviously spun content.
2) email the owners of the linked business and show how google is penalizing sites for this type of content (not that hard to document). 3) offer to have it cleaned up and only get paid if successful. 1000 emails; 1/2 agree; 50% effective; 250 businesses pay you $100. wow, this may be a wso. oh yeah, rinse and repeat.
I would use the law firm of Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe.

To be honest I think the 3rd party has paid a heavy price, firstly for the back links they brought, secondly the back links they had to pay someone to clean, and as quoted before if they had asked nicely most web hosts would remove the content any way. lesson of the day, do not buy a 30,000 back link package from fiver to your web site...........

buy it for your link wheel instead. or just do seo the right way or just pray you do not get caught.

I got a couple of these letters in the past few days for a couple of my general article directories (same letter as in the OP). People are getting "unnatural links" warnings in Webmaster Tools and freaking out. The specific site that sent me the requests dropped from #1 to #12 for an extremely lucrative keyword they had been heavily backlinking for about 2 years.

I doubt removing all their links is going to help, since those links are the only reason they ever got to #1 anyways...

I actually had 12 articles from them, 2 links in each. I just deleted the articles because it's not worth the bother. Not like they were high quality articles anyways.

(I did briefly consider the fiverr spam in revenge, but it's not worth $5.)

The number of people in this thread that don't understand the core issue here is astounding. The point is that this company is causing work for website owners ILLEGALLY. Filing a DMCA notice for a link you want removed is clearly not covered, and I'm sure they know that.

Here's the kicker - with DMCA, your host considers you guilty until proven innocent. They have no interest in getting involved. So I can send your host a DMCA notice that says "Joe has a website that is blue, and I'm offended by the color blue. I demand that he remove the blue from his website because it's infringing on my rights." You're going to get the same form letter and be FORCED to comply or they'll turn your site off. It's just easier than actually evaluating the claim and it clears them of liability.

It's YOUR job to either a) go through however much work it is to comply with the request or b) FAX a freaking letter back to your host (sending it via mail won't get there in time). This situation is exactly why our courts are not 'guilty until proven innocent'.

This situation will only be resolved when people who receive these letters go after the company (guardlex) and force them to pay ridiculous legal fees. But people won't do that, because as everyone in this thread keeps saying "just take them down, it's easier and faster". So they'll keep charging $24 and costing website owners untold amounts of money to hunt down and remove these links.

Removing *free* links cost time, i hate idiots who beg for free links and after that cause problems to remove them, also *free*

remove their links, dosnt worth the time wasted

and go post their website link on BHW with the dmca story, they will have few millions quality backlinks in 1 day.

If you are an a-hole you must get what you deserve. With Google's help ofcourse, stupid ideas result in stupid results.

P.S. I got a lot of *remove my link google spanked me* emails lately, i put them to verify their ownership with a file on their site and remove their links if they comply. It cost me time but its worth as they are business leads anyway, that can be converted.

But first idiot that will cause me problems with my host/registar via a dmca will have their websites wiped from the face of google's index (if you think negative seo cant be possible ... lol, dream on).

I distribute justice without any incentives except my own personal philosophy.

Interesting thread.

A Hubber once asked me to remove links to their Hubs. Since I was using the HubPages RSS feed to get the links I refused.

I'd like to know what the niche was in OP's story.

The disturbing thing about OP's story is that it shows how easy you can lose your hosting - most hosts are very cheap with wafer thin margins and they don't need hassle from lawyers. Closing your account is the easiest way for them to deal with complaints.

I've gotten 5 of these requests in the last week.

I've started responding w/ a form letter stating that my administrative fee is $95 per link.

Maybe those autoblogs I abandoned 2 years ago will turn a profit after all. Makes me wish I hadn't disconnected all the spam feeds. ;-)

I had a company send me an email also. I did find their links. They happened to be located in the comments on my blog. Some spammer was an affiliate of the company. I removed the comments and all is well. Watch out for spam comments on your blogs.

They're still at it; a blog post from pskl.us:

We got a takedown notice from LifeShield for our positive review - pskl.us

Suzanne

I'm nowhere near at the level of knowledge about this stuff that a lot of people here are, but I'll add something.

I live in Japan. I got a cease-and-desist notice a little while back from a competitor who didn't like a review I'd put up on one of my blogs. They wanted the review taken down, the entire blog taken down, a letter of apology, and were threatening to sue for legal damages involving defamation, etc. etc.

This came from an attorney in California. I went ahead and removed the offending review (which, although it was completely factual, was a bit on the sarcastic side) and told them to go jump in a lake for the other stuff. How are they going to sue me in Japan? It simply won't happen. It would cost them more to just look at an attorney who is capable of suing me here than they could ever hope to get in a judgement...assuming that they could even enforce the judgement at all.

I understand that not everyone wants to live outside the USA, or uproot themselves for the sake of their business. But given how things are going in America, I think that it would be a very prudent move to get hosting in some other country (or countries). It doesn't cost much (if any) more, you can usually work in English, and the extra level of protection that you get makes any extra hassle more than worth it in my mind. Americans are used to living with the threat of extreme legal penalties for pretty much any infraction. But most other countries aren't that silly. You do something wrong, you make it right, and that's that. There aren't any millions of dollars in punitive damages yada yada.

If the OP had had his hosting in Belgium (for example; I don't actually know about the law in Belgium), this whole thing probably wouldn't be an issue.

I have had quite a number of requests to remove links from my sites that I did not have anything to do with and in some cases had no knowledge they were even there.

The problem is that this all takes time and I wondered if anyone knows whether as a matter of law one is obliged to remove links upon request?

So far, I never get a response.

But that's ok, as it's a lot easier to paste the form response to 5-10 emails all at once than it is to actually track down and delete the links.

This wouldn't happen to be from that crazy security company would it? Whether it is or not, I read a similar thing, the site fought the DMCA because they said it was a fraudulent use of the form, and they won. No one can force you to take down a link.

Read the article here (I have no affiliation with the site except I'm a reader) We got a takedown notice from LifeShield for our positive review - pskl.us
The take down notice the site posted is quite similar to the one you got.

ETA: If you are a reputable and legitimate site, then don't worry about fighting it cause you'll probably win. If you're doing anything unethical, like the poster above me says, remove the links, its not worth the fight.

In re-reading this thread, I missed the post that gave away the Lifeshield name, and yes, the post above is the same company.