Digital Milenium Copyright Act?

[Ni Ckel]

I have a legal question. My friend recently started getting threatening messages from an anonymous cyber-bully about stolen photographs. My friend goes to conventions in the area, takes pictures for money, then sells those pictures back to the person who paid.
He begin to get messages about two weeks ago saying he stole photos from another con photographer, then fraudulently sold them. This morning he got a message from DMCA saying they confiscated his photos because of illegal practices. Here is the exact message sent to me by him:
"Someone who demanded we take down photos of them and copies as their profile photo... without informing us, with the watermark edited out... and without permission or a link back. DMCA take down notice sent."
I'm wondering if we have a legal matter on our hands. If this is something i can sue for, because of no evidence, it would really help me out. I don't understand the Act very well, but i did read up on it a bit on Wikipedia, with not so much help. If someone could help us out here with knowledge of this Act or similar cases, it would be much appreciated!

[bcnu]

It is complete gibberish. "link back", "photos of them", have nothing to do with DMCA.

If he was the photographer of the pictures in question, then he is the legal owner of the copyright and anyone else can pound sand, unless they have a written document, signed by him, stating otherwise.

Filing a false DMCA takedown notice is illegal and the person doing it can, in theory, be sued for "damages", if they have proof.

17 USC § 512.

[rickinnocal]

Your question makes no sense. You don't get a "letter from DMCA" - DMCA is the name of a law, not an organization.

The response to a letter from an organization saying that they have removed your photos after a DMCA complaint is to write back and tell them that you took the photographs.

Richard

[Yeti]

First off, you can't get a message "from" DMCA. Somebody would normally file a DMCA complaint with a website, like Facebook or YouTube, saying that somebody else is posting their copyrighted material. The material would then be removed, not "confiscated."

It's not clear enough what happened, and if these photos were indeed posted somewhere. Normally if a website removes photos under a DMCA complaint, you can file a statement countering that you're actually the copyright holder. The website then reposts the photos, and you're then individually liable if the person filing the original complaint wants to sue you in court. It's illegal for the original person filing to claim they're the copyright holder if they know they're not. If you file a statement in response saying you're the copyright holder to get the images reposted, you'd better be ready to back it up in court, and prove the person filing the complaint is full of it.