512(f) Plaintiff Must Pay $91k to the Defense–Digital Marketing v. McCandless
It’s typically pointless to bring a 512(f) claim because the law makes it almost impossible to win. Plus, 512(f) plaintiffs have to consider the possibility of a costly fee shift against them. The plaintiff in this case claims that the…
Another Rough Copyright Ruling for Internet Access Providers–Bodyguard v. RCN
This is another lawsuit against IAPs for subscribers’ BitTorrent activity. As I wrote previously: lawsuits against IAPs are problematic for many reasons, including the failure of 512(a), the danger of assuming that notices of claimed infringements (NOCIs) actually reflect infringing…
How Copyright Law Fosters Anti-Competitive Behavior, Part Infinity–Bayam v. ID Tech
Bayam and ID Tech run rival online jewelry businesses. Both use Shopify as a service provider. ID Tech believed that Bayam copies too much of its copyrighted website content and pursued a whirlwind of enforcement activity, including filing two lawsuits…
A 5 Month Check-In on the Copyright Claims Board (CCB)
I prepared these statistics on November 18, 2022, roughly 5 months after launch. Total number of cases: 247. This continues to imply a run rate of about 600 cases per year, or less than 2 cases per day. According to…
Jury Awards Damages to Tattoo Artist for Video-Game Depiction–Alexander v. WWE 2K (Guest Blog Post)
by guest blogger Aaron Perzanowski, University of Michigan Law School Last week, an Illinois jury awarded tattoo artist Catherine Alexander $3,750 in damages at the conclusion of a copyright infringement trial. Alexander claimed that Take-Two Interactive infringed the tattoo designs she inked…
Anti-Circumvention Takedowns Aren’t Covered by 512(f)–Yout v. RIAA
[I’ll blog the Supreme Court’s cert grant in Gonzalez v. Google probably later this week.] Yout’s software allows users to rip digital streams, such as from YouTube. It sought a declaratory judgment that it did not violate 17 USC 1201(a)(1)…
When Do Defendants Have Access to Copyrighted Works Posted to the Internet?–Cooley v. Target Corp.
This case relates to Target’s “Cat & Jack” clothing line. The plaintiff, NOC, is a teenager who has copyrighted designs in hand-drawn dots that Target allegedly copied in the clothing line. Target and NOC had some direct dealings, including bringing…
Photo Licensing Service Qualifies for DMCA Online Safe Harbor–Steinmetz v. ShutterStock
This is a 512(c) online copyright safe harbor case. We rarely see opinions like this any more. In 2022, I’ve blogged just one other 512(c) case (Davis v. Pinterest). (Business Casual v. YouTube should have been a 512(c) case, but…
A 3 Month Check-In on the Copyright Claims Board (CCB)
On September 19, I gathered some CCB stats. This was 95 days after launch. 155 claims had been filed as of that date. (Today, the number is 157). That implies an annual run rate of less than 600 claims. Every…
Fortnite Emotes Don’t Infringe Dance Choreography–Hanagami v. Epic
Kyle Hanagami is a choreographer. He made a video called “How Long” featuring his choreography. It now has 36M+ views. Fortnite offered an emote called “It’s Complicated.” “Ten of the poses in the video and the emote are the same.”…