ClearLaunch
Feature CheckerRegulations & PoliciesEnforcementRadarVendorsChangelogGuides
FAQ
← All Controls

Repeat-infringer termination policy

repeat-infringer-termination-policyDomain: ip-dmcaType: policy

Description

Repeat-infringer termination is the DMCA Section 512 safe-harbor condition that forces hosting platforms to actually terminate the accounts of users who get caught infringing copyright more than a few times, and the operative word in the statute is reasonably implemented. A policy that exists on paper but is not enforced does not satisfy the safe harbor; the Fourth Circuit held this against Cox Communications in BMG v. Cox (2018) and the Second Circuit's Capitol Records v. Vimeo line of cases set parallel guardrails. The substantive elements: a written policy that defines what constitutes a strike (typically a takedown notice the platform has accepted as valid), a threshold at which termination occurs (three-strike rolling-window is conventional but not statutory), an internal review and appeal mechanism for disputed strikes, and a recordkeeping system that documents the strikes per account and the termination decisions. The defensibility argument is whether the policy was actually applied to accounts that crossed the threshold, which is why the per-account audit log matters more than the policy text. The piece that consistently goes wrong is the threshold-crossing logic: counterclaim-tolled strikes, expired strikes that were not actually expired, repeat counts that reset across product lines or across accounts associated with the same user. The pattern that holds up under scrutiny errs on the side of termination at the threshold rather than retaining accounts case-by-case.

Applicability

Applies when: business model role is intermediary or mixed.

How predicates are evaluated

Required by (1 regulation)

  • DMCA

    17 U.S.C. § 512(i)(1)(A): adoption + reasonable implementation of a repeat-infringer termination policy is a qualifying condition for §512 safe harbor (BMG v. Cox 4th Cir. 2018; Capitol Records v. Vimeo 2d Cir. 2016).

    Source →

Fulfilled by (3)

  • markmonitor · partial · low effort · $$$
    MarkMonitor's brand-protection workflows track repeat-infringer counts alongside takedown.
  • copyright-agent · partial · low effort · $$
    Copyright Agent maintains user-strike counters as part of takedown workflow.
  • In-house build · medium effort
    In-house implementation needs a strike counter joined to user-account state + reviewer queue + termination workflow + appeals process.

ClearLaunch does not accept payment from vendors. Methodology.

Evidence formats

  • published repeat-infringer policy in ToS / help center
  • strike-counter audit trail per user account
  • termination decision log with reviewer + reasoning
  • appeal handling SOP + decision log
  • annual board / legal review of policy effectiveness

ClearLaunch provides legal information based on publicly available regulatory sources. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before making compliance decisions.

ClearLaunch

Regulatory intelligence for people who ship products.

Tools
Feature CheckerRegulations & PoliciesVendorsGuidesFor LegalFor EngineeringFor ExecutivesFor Investors
About
AboutMethodologyChangelogFAQRegulatory UpdatesClearLaunch on LinkedIn
Legal
Terms of ServicePrivacy PolicyHow we handle your dataCoverage scope & limitations

Built by Neel Patel, in-house game counsel. Games touch more compliance domains at once than anything else in tech. That's what ClearLaunch was designed around.

ClearLaunch provides legal information based on publicly available regulatory sources. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before making compliance decisions. Operated by a Washington-licensed attorney. Not licensed in California or other US states. ClearLaunch provides legal information; consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. Data reviewed through March 2026. Methodology

© 2026 ClearLaunch · Terms · Privacy