You are very well informed about this being more of a trademark issue than a copyright issue. I would certainly pursue this path.

All too often web hosts believe they have the right to remove content immediately upon receiving a DMCA notification. The item need not be removed immediately.

This seems to be a trend.
1.Host receives DMCA notice
2. Item removed
3. Person is notified

In some cases, the entire site is taken down temporarily until the user files a counternotification and the notification is deemed valid.

In other cases, I have run into people who received no notification from the ISP or host at all.

I would hope that
4. Users will use the counternotification to maintain their rights.

http://www.knowprose.com/node/17474

You see, many of these ad farmers don’t even own the rights that they claim to have.

Ordinal’s just the next one griping.

Hamlet has ignored the issue of ad farms so long that its laughable that it took this for him to take it seriously (sorry, Hamlet, calling it as I see it). Rik’s the same way. It *finally* got their attention, and I’ve got about a year’s worth of archived data on the subject.

They’re covering it, I’m bored with it. :-) I’ll comment here, but I’m unlikely to write about it myself until something actually noteworthy happens. The DMCA tactic is not noteworthy.

If someone wants to pull the DMCA on screenshots of their work within Second Life then they probably shouldn’t be putting them in Second Life. That is, quite simply, a no brainer. However, the tactic is one that I have planned to use for some time when it comes to defending one’s reputation. Seeing it used here does not surprise me. It surprises me that so many people are surprised.

And the hilarious part – and the irony – is that someone is filing a DMCA on advertising areas that… thrive on attention. DUH.

Now, here’s the rub in Second Life that all the… popular folk… are missing:

(1) Ad farms are considered a negative behavior by the majority in Second Life. I’m going out on a limb by saying that, but I’m sure an independent poll would say that they are disliked. At best, they are tolerated. The money behind them is easy.

(2) Infringement of copyright/trademark is considered a negative behavior, but as noted here and in most places where people are literate, fair use is pretty self-evident. ‘Fair Use’, however, has many implementations globally. If Ordinal were in Antigua, for example (http://www.knowprose.com/node/18354 ), Flickr would be in the middle of a WTO discussion!

(3) Linden Lab has to comply with DMCA, as does Flickr and any web host of data. But if Linden Lab didn’t reward negative behavior, Ordinal wouldn’t be accused of a DMCA violation.

I’m betting this blows over, unless Ordinal is willing to lawyer up and protect Fair Use in the United States. As for me, personally, I’d write Flickr – but if Linden Lab does not write Flickr and state it is a public space, then Flickr has to protect its interests.

The most important aspect of this, that everyone is completely missing, is the citizen journalist aspect. Using the DMCA in this way defends reputation, but it also erodes anything resembling ‘Fair Use’ in international copyright law.

Credit where credit is due – the 16m ad farmers are well represented here. And boy, does Linden Lab look stupid. Again. But Hamlet and Rik won’t write that. :-D

A Class Action Lawsuit Related to 16m Ads?
http://www.your2ndplace.com/node/565

How Linden Lab Does Not Protect Land Value
http://www.your2ndplace.com/node/336

Some helpful links on this:

Statute text (OCILLA section of the DMCA): http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/512.html

Also, Chilling Effects has a counter-notice generator here:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca/counter512.pdf