Strike 3’s Copyright Litigation Campaign Completely Strikes Out

Another judge denies an unmasking subpoena to Strike 3, even though the judge has previously issued subpoenas to Strike 3, and even though it may mean that Strike 3’s infringement case will fail and Strike 3 will be left without…

Internet Access Provider May Be Vicariously Liable for Subscribers' BitTorrent Downloads--Warner Bros. v. Charter

Internet Access Provider May Be Vicariously Liable for Subscribers’ BitTorrent Downloads–Warner Bros. v. Charter

This is another copyright infringement lawsuit against an Internet access provider for subscribers’ allegedly infringing P2P file sharing activity. It extends the copyright owners’ successes in two similar lawsuits, BMG v. Cox and UMG v. Grande. In this ruling, the…

E*Trade Defeats Copyright Claim Over Dancing Old Man in Commercial--Vacchi v. E*Trade

E*Trade Defeats Copyright Claim Over Dancing Old Man in Commercial–Vacchi v. E*Trade

Gianluca Vacchi is an Italian entrepreneur. He has a large social media presence, including nearly 12M Instagram followers and 1.8M Facebook followers. He claims his social media presence depicts a fictional alter ego who is “an extravagant millionaire dancing with…

Partial Screenshot Qualifies as Fair Use (on a Motion to Dismiss)--Yang v. Mic

Partial Screenshot Qualifies as Fair Use (on a Motion to Dismiss)–Yang v. Mic

We’ve blogged about a few cases involving screenshots of newspaper pages consisting of copyrighted photos, including Clark v. TransAlt and Hirsch v. Complex Media. This case adds to that canon, but not in a particularly enlightening way. The screenshot at…

“Copyright Troll” Lawyer Gets Sanctioned (Again)–Sands v. Bauer Media

Attorney Richard Liebowitz has filed more than 1,100 lawsuits since the beginning of 2016, a campaign this judge calls a “downpour.” This initiative has not gone smoothly. The court recaps: Mr. Liebowitz has been sanctioned, reprimanded, and advised to “clean…

There Is Essentially No Statute of Limitations for Online Copyright Infringement--APL v. US

There Is Essentially No Statute of Limitations for Online Copyright Infringement–APL v. US

This case involves a photo of stem cells, which allegedly used to be quite uncommon and therefore allegedly commanded a premium license fee. So you can see what’s worth litigating in federal court against the mightiest government in the world,…

Reminder: The Copyright Office Will Be Yanking Eligibility for the DMCA Online Safe Harbor (Again)

Reminder: The Copyright Office Will Be Yanking Eligibility for the DMCA Online Safe Harbor (Again)

In 2016, the Copyright Office rejiggered how it handles DMCA Online Safe Harbor agent designations. Instead of an indefinite designation, a service could only designate an agent for 3 years, after which the designation would automatically expire unless renewed. The…

Domain Name Registrar Isn’t Liable for Counterfeit Goods–InvenTel v. GoDaddy

InvenTel makes security cams for cars. It is trying to crack down on Chinese counterfeiters. It brought a prior lawsuit against a wide range of defendants, including GoDaddy. InvenTel voluntarily dismissed GoDaddy from that suit. It brought a second round…

Copyright Protection for Banana Costumes Is, Uh, Bananas--Silvertop v. Kangaroo

Copyright Protection for Banana Costumes Is, Uh, Bananas–Silvertop v. Kangaroo

The Third Circuit has held that a banana costume qualified for copyright protection (the blog reference to the district court opinion). The plaintiff’s design is on the left. The defendants’ designs are in the middle and on the right. The…

Claim Over Takedown Notice Triggers Anti-SLAPP Law & a Fee Shift--Complex v. X17 [EDITED TO CORRECT A MAJOR ERROR]

Claim Over Takedown Notice Triggers Anti-SLAPP Law & a Fee Shift–Complex v. X17 [EDITED TO CORRECT A MAJOR ERROR]

*** CRITICAL UPDATE*** Ugh, I’m embarrassed to admit that I made a serious error in reading the opinion. I cannot edit the post to correct the error. The mistake infects the entire post and the main point. I’m leaving up…