You must notify the user and give them the opportunity to file a counter-notice against the complaint. Safe Harbor protects you from this kind of lawsuit.
Also forward a copy of the complainant's letter to chilling effects.
Greetings from a place called Canada. Different laws up here. It's not so cut and dry (we've already checked this with our attorneys). That said, we'll defend vigorously.
I frequently have to remind my fellow citizens that it makes little sense to plead the 5th here, because whether parliament has sat in the last year will not effect the outcome of your trial.
it makes little sense to plead the 5th here, because whether parliament has sat in the last year will not effect the outcome of your trial
Ah, but you're looking at Section 5 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and when people say "plead the fifth" they're talking about the fifth amendment to the constitution.
Of course, we don't number our constitutional amendments; but if you look at them in chronological order, I believe the fifth would be the Statute Law Revision Act, 1893, which... well, actually it did nothing at all except to repeal sections of the British North America Act which no longer had any effect.
You probably know more about DMCA than me, but I thought it was just about copyright infringement? The post claims the guy who complained in this case was complaining about "defamatory material".
You never know with American laws. They seem to have a funny way of cramming in totally irrelevant nonsense into bills as a way of getting unpopular items into law.
In the first paragraph of the post "he claimed the page ... contained defamatory material" so this isn't the normal cut and dry copyright infringement notice. I'm sure they know how safe harbor works.
Having Safe Harbor option doesn't mean that one have to use it as the one may just happen to decide to take a stand against the things s/he doesn't like.
I'm surprised to find this reply at the bottom, as it's the most important point here (besides lack of jurisdiction): the DMCA doesn't require anything from ISPs, it grants them immunity if they follow the procedure. They're allowed to ignore a takedown, they are just liable.
Time to read up on it, especially this part: https://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID130
And: https://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID922
You must notify the user and give them the opportunity to file a counter-notice against the complaint. Safe Harbor protects you from this kind of lawsuit.
Also forward a copy of the complainant's letter to chilling effects.