Another Bad Ruling in Louis Vuitton v. Akanoc
…servers.” * the defendants didn’t designate a 512 agent for notice until 4 months after the case was filed, so they could not claim 512 protection before that time (why…
Viacom v. YouTube Summary Judgment Motions Highlights
…I personally think Viacom overemphasized this point. Service providers are trapped in a dilemma. If they do more screening than 512 requires, copyright owners say that evidences their right and…
Why I Support HR 4364, the Proposed Federal Anti-SLAPP Bill
…from the Internet. 17 USC 512(f) provides a limited counterbalance against bogus copyright takedown notices; it could provide a useful starting point for conceptualizing a broader anti-bogus-takedown law. How You…
February 2010 Quick Links
…out of the marketplace. * Project DoD, Inc. v. Federici, 2010 WL 559115 (D. Me. Feb. 11, 2010). In a 512(f) lawsuit I blogged about in December, the judge upheld…
Rare Ruling on Damages for Sending Bogus Copyright Takedown Notice–Lenz v. Universal
…implications for future 512(f) cases. 512(f) says that the sender of an impermissible takedown notice “shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred [by the 512(f)…
Facebook User Agreement Upheld in Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Over Third Party App–Miller v. Facebook
…from 512(c) or 512(d) coverage if the C&D satisfied the 512(c)(3) requirements. Even if Facebook can’t claim 512 protection, Miller faces a potential uphill battle proving his allegations that the…
Google and China: Some General Thoughts
…230 or (in most cases) even a weak safe harbor like 17 USC 512, plus local cultural norms may tolerate unpopular speech less than we do. So what should a…
512(f) Claim Dismissed on Jurisdictional Grounds–Project DoD v. Federici
By Eric Goldman Project DOD, Inc. v. Federici, 2009 WL 4910320 (D. Me. Dec. 13, 2009) 17 USC 512(f) creates a cause of action for sending bogus copyright takedown notices….
Torrent Sites Induce Infringement and Lose DMCA Safe Harbor–Columbia v. Fung
…culpable conduct in inducing third party infringement.” The 512 Safe Harbor Fung’s websites link to the actual BitTorrent files, so 512(d) (the DMCA safe harbor for linking to infringing works)…
Another Cautionary Tale of Joint Website Ownership–TEG v. Phelps [UPDATED]
…give rise to a 512(f) claim for misrepresented takedown notices because, for several reasons, Phelps had a subjective good faith belief in their legitimacy. * although Phelps infringed the corporation’s…