<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 12/5/2016 2:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABPTjTBCUc4HuMc6bYJUG0VA+AoAXmjniDTMkaS98NAFSXftEg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">This sounds somehow interesting. Could
you explain in short, what kind of cases this sentence was
about? How often does this occur?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Generally requests involving data which is in error or we would
normally remove even without a complaint if we became aware of it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABPTjTBCUc4HuMc6bYJUG0VA+AoAXmjniDTMkaS98NAFSXftEg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">Another question in the context of
takedown requests: How many of these come from official public
entities and how many are from private entities (especially:
have there been any from public entities, and from which and
what).<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABPTjTBCUc4HuMc6bYJUG0VA+AoAXmjniDTMkaS98NAFSXftEg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Does British law consent you to speak
about these cases or are there regulations that prevent you from
openly informing the members of such incidents (like "gag
orders" in the US)?</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
We have had a total of zero court orders and one valid DMCA takedown
request. The takedown request was from a private individual, the
data in question was removed, and the user who added the data
admitted copying from the source who sent the request. This was back
in 2013, so I don't remember much more without doing research.<br>
<br>
What we get tends to be in the nature of complaints, not takedown
requests, and we're capable of resolving everything without needing
to involve a formal takedown request. These are also not handled by
the board, but part of the scope of the DWG.<br>
</body>
</html>