2019: Jul 1 – Dec 31

Copyright

Totals for this time period

  • Total notices received4,851
  • Percentage of notices where some or all content was removed27%
  • Counter notices received11
Total notices received Percentage of notices where some or all content was removed Percentage of notices rejected as incomplete Percentage of notices rejected as abusive Counter notices received
July 913  25%  64%  9% 1
August 781  25%  67%  7% 0
September 866  19%  72%  9% 2
October 1125  36%  58%  5% 4
November 545  27%  67%  5% 4
December 621  24%  66%  11% 0
TOTAL 4,851  27%  65%  8% 11

Notes

  • The table above indicates the number of copyright infringement notices we received during each month of the reporting period. Each notice may cover more than one site and/or piece of content. Some notices identify dozens of allegedly infringing materials. In the future, we’ll aim to provide more specific data on the number of sites affected and items removed, as those numbers are substantially greater and more accurately represent the impact of DMCA notices than the number of individual notices received.
  • The “percentage of notices where some or all content was removed” includes those notices which were formally complete, but the site was suspended for a separate violation of the WordPress.com Terms of Service (spam or warez sites, for example). If we instead counted these as rejected notices, the “percentage of notices where some or all content was removed” would be much lower.
  • We carefully review each notice to ensure it’s formally complete, and includes all information required by the DMCA, before taking action. Notices that don’t meet the requirements of the statute are included in “notices rejected as incomplete.”
  • We also may decline to remove content if a notice is abusive. “Abusive” notices may be formally complete, but are directed at fair use of content, material that isn’t copyrightable, or content the complaining party misrepresents ownership of a copyright. You can see some examples of notices we’ve rejected on grounds of abuse in our Hall of Shame.
  • We forward all formally complete notices to users, regardless of whether we process them.
  • Under the DMCA, a user can formally challenge a notice of copyright infringement by submitting a counter notice. When we receive a counter notice, we forward a copy to the individual who submitted the original DMCA notice and restore access to the content if no further action is taken. During this reporting period, only 1% of the valid DMCA notices we received were later subject to a counter notice.

Top Complainants (Jul – Dec 2019)

Reporting Organizations Number of Notices
Attributor 527
Right Blaster 315
Backgrid USA, Inc. 305
Comeso 211
3antS Development & Strategies S.L. 201
IFPI 197
Athletia Sports 122
BPI (British Recorded Music Industry) 114
Faisal Khan 110
DigiGuardians 74

Notes

The numbers above represent the total notices submitted by different organizations over the relevant period. These are grouped by the originating e-mail address, and so the total number of notices submitted per copyright holder may be greater than shown above if multiple e-mail addresses were used for the submissions – though we do our best to group complainants together. Please note that the notices received may be sent on behalf of a number of different copyright holders utilising a shared third party agent, and relate to a number of different websites.

Trademark

Totals for this time period

  • Number of notices received338
  • Percentage of notices where some or all content was removed12%
  • Number of unique complainants184
Number of notices received Number of notices where some or all content was removed Percentage of requests where some or all content was removed
July 58 13  22%
August 56 3  5%
September 52 2  4%
October 69 11  16%
November 44 5  11%
December 59 5  8%
TOTAL 338 39  12%

Notes

  • Unlike the DMCA for copyright infringement, there isn’t a statutory prescribed process for notice/take-down of alleged trademark infringement, nor is there a statutory safe harbor for hosting alleged TM infringement.
  • For each report of trademark infringement we receive, we evaluate whether or not the trademark is used in an infringing manner.
  • Simply referencing a company, brand, product, or service in a WordPress.com post does not constitute infringement. Anyone is free to use a trademark if it’s necessary to identify a company, brand or product for the purposes of criticism or commentary.
  • Most of the infringement allegations we see are from trademark owners attempting to censor a user’s comments or criticisms of their brands or companies. We reject these complaints and forward them on to users so that they can make fully informed decisions regarding the content.
  • “Percentage of requests where some or all content was removed” does not include cases where content was removed for violating our Terms of Service. For example, after viewing the site, we may remove it for reasons relating to spam regardless of the validity of the trademark claim.
  • Unique complainants are grouped by the complainant’s e-mail address, and so the total number of notices submitted per unique trademark may differ.