anti-dmca.org

A takedown hit your work

Filing a DMCA counter-notice

A counter-notification is how you tell a platform the removal was a mistake and ask for your material back. It works, and there's a hard clock on it. It also commits you to something most guides skip over: agreeing in advance to be sued in a court you don't choose.

Check this first: it may not be a DMCA matter at all

A lot of removals that feel like takedowns aren't governed by the statute, and filing a counter-notice against them does nothing.

  • YouTube Content ID claims are a private contractual system Google built. They have their own dispute and appeal path. A counter-notice is the wrong instrument. The difference is worth five minutes.
  • Terms-of-service removals for nudity, harassment, spam or a listing rule have nothing to do with copyright, however the notification is worded.
  • Trademark complaints are a separate regime with no statutory counter-notice at all. Platforms handle them under their own policies.

If the message you received names a copyright owner, mentions the DMCA or Section 512, and says the material was removed on request, you're in the right place.

The four things it must contain

From 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3). All four, or the provider can disregard it.

Required elementWhat it means in practice
Your signaturePhysical or electronic. Typing your name is accepted everywhere.
What was removed, and from whereIdentify the material and the location it appeared at before removal. Give the original URL even though it's now dead.
Good faith statement, swornUnder penalty of perjury, that you believe the material was removed as a result of mistake or misidentification.
Name, address, phone, and consent to jurisdictionYou consent to the federal district court where you live, or, if you're outside the United States, to any district where the provider can be found. You also agree to accept service of process from the person who complained.

Two things that surprise people

Your details go to the person who filed the complaint. The provider is required to forward your counter-notice to them, contact information included. If that person is the reason you're worried, weigh this before filing.

Outside the US, you're consenting to the platform's home court. For most large services that means a federal district in California. Your home country's rules are not what you're agreeing to.

Build the counter-notice

This runs entirely in your browser. Nothing is sent anywhere. The page has no server behind it. Read every line of what comes out before you use it; you are signing it, not us.

DMCA counter-notification · § 512(g)(3)

The provider's designated agent, or the platform name if you're using their form.
Describe it plainly: the video title, the listing name, the file.
One URL per line. Give it even though the link is now dead; the statute asks for it.
Be specific and factual. "I shot this footage myself in March 2026" or "the track is licensed to me, licence ref 88-4120". Only say what you can stand behind.
The district covering your address. For example, "the Eastern District of Pennsylvania". If you're unsure, look it up before filing rather than guessing.

What happens next

On receipt The provider forwards your counter-notice, with your contact details, to whoever filed the complaint.
10–14 days It restores the material in not less than 10 and not more than 14 business days. Business days: weekends and holidays don't count, so two weeks on the calendar is closer to three. § 512(g)(2)(C)
Or not If the complainant tells the provider they've filed a court action against you in that window, nothing is restored and the matter is now litigation.

In practice the great majority of counter-notices end with the material coming back and nothing else happening. Filing a federal lawsuit is expensive, and most people sending takedowns have no intention of going that far. That's the leverage the counter-notice gives you, but it only works if you're genuinely prepared for the small chance they do.

The real risk, stated plainly

You are swearing, under penalty of perjury, that the material was removed by mistake or misidentification. § 512(f) makes a knowing material misrepresentation in a counter-notice actionable in exactly the same way as a false takedown: damages, plus costs and legal fees.

So the honest test is not "do I want my video back". It is: can I show the removal was wrong? If you used someone else's music without a licence and hoped nobody would notice, a counter-notice makes your position worse, not better. If you own what you posted, or your use was lawful and you can explain why, it is the right instrument and it usually works.

Fair use, a licence with murky terms, a sample, a disputed commission: where it's close, that's the point to spend money on an hour with a copyright lawyer rather than on guessing.

Last reviewed 2026-08-20. This page describes United States law (17 U.S.C. § 512). It is information, not legal advice. See the disclaimer.