Digitalrev.com gives the GoPro Hero3 a bad review, so GoPro DMCAs the review away...

Digitalrev.com : GOPRO Hero 3 vs SONY HDR-AS15 - Which Action Camera should you get?

DRev not telling the whole story:
http://www.theverge.co​m …g-review-with-dmca-notice

http://techcrunch.com/​2013/03/20/run-dmca/

Seems GoPro weren't being clear enough, but DRev by editing the notice, is trying to make GoPro look like a horrible anti-free speech corporate bully when in fact it is nothing of the sort. The URL DRev shows in the takedown notice was for their review, but was only one of several URLs (which they cut out to make it seem like GoPro was targeting the review).

And in actuality, the review was good if anything, not bad.

Sony looks better.

Sirrith wrote in post #15738820
DRev not telling the whole story:....

Here's a revelation!

In my mind GoPro took a major hit as far as my consumer faith in them goes. They wrote a horrible and vague DMCA take down notice, and even with the other links that were in the original it is not greatly improved.

So what does that tell me, as a customer, about buying their products? It screams potential headache. If I have a site up, and talk about the gear I use and the methods I use to produce images, and then make some slip up that catches their eye... Then I'm putting myself at risk of them making a pest of themselves and giving me a hard time.

I haven't heard of Sony doing such things yet (But I've heard of them issuing well worded and clear DMCA take downs in other instances) so I'm inclined to replace the half dozen GoPros on my gear wishlist with another company's product.

this is not the first time DMCA has been abused by companies - similar takedowns have happened in the past. When clueless politos pass such broad based laws - this is the result. Brings back memories of "license raj"/redtape days of the 70's and 80's in India.

BTW DigitalRev is right in taking down the video immediately - else the entire site would have been down. Recently a horrible private unethical Business- School in India managed to take down r73 urls which had defamatory content against it including leading news websites, forums and even the University Grants Commission in India.

http://www.socialsamos​a.com …s-arindam-chaudhuri-iipm/

Actually GoPro's request for takedown was legit, but their lazy lax wording suggested it was overly broad and for any reference to their trademark elements. It was poor handling. A little more work to address their issues and Help the site owners correct the minor mistakes would have gone a whole lot farther than a cheap knee-jerk take down.

The other problem with DMCA takedown abuse is that people who receive them don't take the time to learn their rights or how to reply to them. Many times people feel they get steamrolled by them because they don't realize that they're perfectly within their rights to use the content, but panic when they get a DMCA against their site. If you're not actually violating copyright or trademark laws, then you fill out the paperwork, bounce it back to all parties involved, and your host goes "Well, this is all in order, everyone carry on as you were 'cause my backside is covered, let me know of any court rulings on the issue".

People take DRev seriously?

Crashoran wrote in post #15740206
People take DRev seriously?

They are the youtube version of DXOmark

The title to this thread is ridiculous. DigitalRev suggested that you buy the GoPro over the Sony. It wasn't a bad review.

reads like someone started typing before they had their coffee

The TL;DR version as I gather it from comments:
DigitalRev posted a review in which they used GoPro's stock images.
GoPro issued a DMCA takedown notice on URL's containing those images. They did NOT explicitly mention which part of the URL was infringing, and merely stated their trademarks GOPRO and HERO in the takedown request.
DigitalRev was then forced to take down the entire review, since any non-compliance with a DMCA takedown would seriously jeopardize get their store and marketing by having their account taken down.

GoPro's update later on:
They weren't trying to take down the review, but as the DigitalRev Store is not an authorized reseller of GoPro, they weren't allowed to use GoPro's stock images (neither in the store, nor in the review).
(Note: they did explicitly point to the review in the DMCA takedown, so this is simply a false statement)

My take on it:
GoPro is at fault here. Using stock images, even if copyrighted, should be fair use on a review (albeit lazy) and GoPro's attitude towards the use of copyighted images like this will only hurt them. If they wanted the images removed, they should have pointed at them explicitly in the DMCA takedown request, rather than fencing with their trademarks, which was completely beside the point.

This way, GoPro implicate themselves by making it appear like they are silencing a negative review by abusing the DMCA, and DigitalRev is completely justified in portraying the situation as such.

That is idiotic. You cannot use someone else's pictures without their permission. DigitalRev wasn't doing this for educational reasons. They do it to sell cameras. They used pictures they did not have permission to use for commercial gain.

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #15746087
That is idiotic. You cannot use someone else's pictures without their permission. DigitalRev wasn't doing this for educational reasons. They do it to sell cameras. They used pictures they did not have permission to use for commercial gain.

Agreed, unless you believe any anyone doing reviews should not have to abide by copyright laws.

If somebody reviewing travel trips to Yellowstone starts to use my landscape shot of Yellowstone I'd be a tad annoyed if the just took my images for their site.