DMCA is short. Google for it then read it. (Score 1)

George, Let me start by saying, the DMCA is a horrible law that is abused more than it is used legitimately. It should be abolished or re-written to place more of the burden on the complainant or at least create some serious financial penalties to discourage bogus filings (enough that a lawyer would jump to take a good DMCA case on contingency). That said, DMCA is the law and the other side in your case has the law on their side in so far as "process". The DMCA law is not terribly long. I suggest you Google for it and read it yourself. You will see that DMCA has a very specific process under which you get some significant legal protection If you do not follow that process you run significant legal and financial risk. No matter how stupid or unfair, the law is quite clear that you are not eligible for the safe harbor provisions under the law unless you first take down the content. You must then file a counter-notice in federal court. Only a federal judge can say if a post like yours constitutes infringement or is protected by "fair use". The cost of doing could well be in excess of $10,000. I read the post on Slashdot. You are getting a boatload of BAD advice. There were one or two good posts, the rest have been rubbish. It is all well and good for anonymous commenters to grandstand the issue but YOU will be the one writing the check if you lose. As is often the case, some Slashdot readers have said "go to the EFF". You should certainly try them but they are not a legal aid society and can, at best, cherry-pick cases that might help establish legal precedent. They do have some lawyers who will take cases pro bono but that is also going to require some luck on your part. You should also file the take down notice with Chilling Effects. Also, file the case in the Citizen Media Law Project database. I would also strongly recommend that you (and any other bloggers here) read the EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers and/or take the course on Media Law for Bloggers at NewsU. I am well aware that few bloggers want to hear it but the reality is that the term "blogger" has no legal meaning in court. You are a "publisher" and as such are bound by any laws that relate to being a publisher -- defamation, copyright infringement, privacy laws, etc. As a publisher you would be well-advised to have an attorney on retainer. If you cannot afford that you should, at the very least, learn the basics of media law. If you have personal assets like a house, money in the bank or a future income stream, you would be well-advised to consider media liability insurance. You might already have some insurance coverage through an existing policy like homeowners insurance but you should check with your broker to see what exactly is covered. In some cases, only judgements are covered in which case you may be on the hook for legal fees. Also, if you take in ANY money from your site your policy may treat the blog as a business and deny your claim. Bottom line, take 1-2 hours and LEARN about media law. Then make your decisions. Unfortunately, it should become clear that when the other side has a lawyer, YOU need a lawyer and any good lawyer is going to tell you to first take down the material and then decide whether to file a counter-claim. Robert Cox President Media Bloggers Association http://www.mediabloggers.org/ [e-mail]