DMCA: would you rather pay $110 or $6?

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), internet service providers who want “safe harbor” (from being held liable for copyright infringement committed by their users) must designate an agent to receive notifications of alleged infringement.

Way Too Simplistic Example. YouTube doesn’t want to be liable, if you post a video that infringes on somebody else’s copyright. If YouTube follows the DMCA rules, they get “safe harbor” and won’t be liable. There are quite a few DMCA rules. One of them says that YouTube has to designate a person (their “agent”) to receive notices of infringement. So if you post that video, and I’m the “somebody else” upon whose copyright it infringes, I send my notice of alleged infringement to YouTube’s “designated agent.”

The rules also say that YouTube has to file a form with the Copyright Office, identifying their designated agent and supplying that person’s contact information. The form is made public, so copyright owners know who to contact (and how to reach them) in the event of infringement.

OK, so here’s the point. Right now, that form gets filed on paper and there’s a $110 filing fee. (Actually, it’s $140 because the internet service provider has to pay another $35 to list alternate URLs and names under which it is known — and almost everyone needs to do this.)

Well, it looks like the Copyright Office is finally close to implementing an online system for providing designated agent information — and they think it will increase efficiency so much, that a fee reduction from $110 to $6 is warranted.

The Copyright Office is seeking comment from the public, to see if we think this would be a good idea.

You think?