Parody site ClownStrike defended the "obvious" fair use.

Doesn’t CrowdStrike have more important things to do right now than try to take down a parody site?

That’s what IT consultant David Senk wondered when CrowdStrike sent a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice targeting his parody site ClownStrike.

Senk created ClownStrike in the aftermath of the largest IT outage the world has ever seen—which CrowdStrike blamed on a buggy security update that shut down systems and incited prolonged chaos in airports, hospitals, and businesses worldwide…

  • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    160·
    4 months ago

    They don’t. Companies regularly abuse DMCA notices because the law REQUIRES a hosting company to take down the information immediately.

    It allows 14 days for the same information to be restored after receiving a counter notice.

    • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
      24·
      3 months ago

      I think if DMCAs are abused, it should limit the company’s ability to file one in the future.

      and if not… regular people could do the same

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        18·
        3 months ago

        Laws only apply to poor people. If you submit a bogus DMCA that takes down a corporation’s site, they will sue you so hard your children’s children will be paying off the debt.

        It’s all by design. The level of damage is measured by capital, and not by how illegitimate, anti-competitive, immoral, or criminal the actions are. There aren’t any multipliers to level the playing field against their wealth and power. All of the multipliers are in their favor.