Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Chilling Effects
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Notices > Notices > DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Twitter (NoticeID 196738, Printer-friendly version

DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Twitter

January 10, 2012


Sender Information:
Benj Pasek and Justin Paul
Sent by:
Schreck Rose Dapello Adams & Hurwitz LLP

New York, NY, 10019, US

Recipient Information:


San Francisco, CA, USA

Sent via: email
Re: DMCA takedown notice

Dear Phantasm:

Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Below please find the information you requested:

1. A physical or electronic signature of the copyright owner or the person authorized to act on its behalf.

[redacted], Esq., attorney for copyright owners Benj Pasek and Justin Paul

2. A description of the copyrighted work that you claim has been infringed; please identify the original work by providing a link or other evidence or description;

The tweet references sheet music of copyrighted compositions written by our clients Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, and alerts Twitter users of a pirate site distributing the sheet music without authorization.

The sheet music is authorized for sale on the following site, for $8.99 per song or $105 for a songbook: The pirate site,, is not authorized to distribute the sheet music for free, or as part of their service.

3. A detailed description of the infringing material and information reasonably sufficient to permit Twitter to locate the material on our website or services. If you are reporting the content of a Tweet, please give us a direct link to that Tweet following these instructions: Otherwise, please specify if the alleged infringement is in the background, avatar, etc.

The user @_likebreathing has posted a tweet which informs the public of a website,, that is distributing our clients's copyrighted material without authorization:
"Pasek and Paul's sheet music is $105 on their site...but it's free on > haha."

The link is as follows:!/_likebreathing/status/154706873210241024

We ask that the Twitter public not be encouraged to visit infringing sites. Kindly remove this tweet. We have contacted as well.


4. Your contact information, including your address, telephone number, and email;

[redacted], Esq.

Schreck Rose Dapello Adams & Hurwitz LLP


New York, NY 10019

tel. [redacted]

fax [redacted]

email: [redacted]

5. A statement by you that you have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and\

I have good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

6. A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and, under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.

The information in this notification is accurate, and I state under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]

Question: Why does a user-generated content site get DMCA takedown notices for links users have posted?

Answer: Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(d), a safe-harbor for providers of "information location tools." These safe harbors give providers immunity from liability for users' possible copyright infringement -- if they "expeditiously" remove material when they get complaints. Whether or not the provider would have been liable for infringement by users' materials it links to, the provider can avoid the possibility of a lawsuit for money damages by following the DMCA's takedown procedure when it gets a complaint. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous.

Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection?

Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions.

In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent's name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)]

Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].

Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)?

Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.

Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.

Question: Does a service provider have to follow the safe harbor procedures?

Answer: No. An ISP may choose not to follow the DMCA takedown process, and do without the safe harbor. If it would not be liable under pre-DMCA copyright law (for example, because it is not contributorily or vicariously liable, or because there is no underlying copyright infringement), it can still raise those same defenses if it is sued.

Question: How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?

Answer: If you believe your material was removed because of mistake or misidentification, you can file a "counter notification" asking the service provider to put it back up. Chilling Effects offers a form to build your own counter-notice.

For more information on the DMCA Safe Harbors, see the FAQs on DMCA Safe Harbor. For more information on Copyright and defenses to copyright infringement, see Copyright.

Topic maintained by Chilling Effects

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse -
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts