united-states copyright dmca online
Why don&#39;t companies supply all of the needed information about their DMCA designated agents?
<p>I wrote "why" for lack of a better short way of saying: I'm assuming these large companies won't take a chance of being sued for this, and furthermore assume that they know the law requires it, so perhaps I misunderstood the law.</p>

<p>From <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this link</a> (supplied by <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/a/32631/5725">David Siegel</a>)  </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>by making available through its service, ... the name, address, phone
  number, and electronic mail address of the agent.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>See <a href="https://www.apple.com/legal/contact/copyright-infringement.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">a very large company's DMCA page</a> which seems to lack that.</p>

<p>So, "why" is the required (?) information absent?</p>

<p>It is always hard to say why a large company does or does not do something, but do note the next line of the law which mentions:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>other contact information which the Register of Copyrights may deem appropriate.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In general the purpose of the contact info is to allow claimants to file claims of infringement with the agent.  If that purpose is served, I doubt anyone will sue over the exact form of the contact info provided, but I cannot be sure.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act" rel="nofollow noreferrer">wikipedia article</a> that i linked to in my previous answer also says:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>There is a common practice of providing a link to legal notices at the bottom of the main web page of a site. It may be prudent, though it is not required by the provisions of section 512 of the copyright law, to include the designated agent information on the page the legal link goes to, in addition to any other places where it is available. As long as the site gives reasonable notice that there is a method of compliance, that should be sufficient. Once again the courts have not ruled on the technicalities of posting of these notices. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>It seems that the law in these matters is not fully tested in the courts.</p>
