Remove 2017 Remove Cease and Desist Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

512(f) Once Again Ensnared in an Employment Ownership Dispute–Shande v. Zoox

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This paradigm, however, breaks down when copyright ownership is contested. In that circumstance, the takedown notice becomes a proxy battle for a larger and likely fact-dependent war over ownership, which the service in the middle isn’t in a good position to resolve. Benjamin * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017?

article thumbnail

‘Where thou documents?’ asks BHC, denying interim injunction to Shemaroo

SpicyIP

Shemaroo entered into assignment deeds with the producers and owners of the suit films between 2004-2016, acquiring sole, exclusive and absolute ownership of all the vested copyrights. However, after expiration of the period, Defendant 2 continued to exploit rights against which Plaintiff issued a cease and desist notice twice.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Record Label Sends Bogus Takedown Notice, Defeats 512(f) Claim Anyway–White v. UMG

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Despite UMG’s lack of ownership in the beat, UMG’s “content protection specialist” found the song Oi! It’s not like UMG had some colorable reason to think it owned the beat; its takedown notice was the direct and foreseeable consequence of its own incomplete tracking of its asset ownership and licensing status.

article thumbnail

Once Again, LinkedIn Can’t Use CFAA To Stop Unwanted Scraping–hiQ v. LinkedIn

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

LinkedIn lawsuit started in 2017. The court remains skeptical of LinkedIn’s privacy-based arguments: LinkedIn has no protected property interest in the data contributed by its users, as the users retain ownership over their profiles. Are robots.txt, IP address blocks, or cease-and-desist letters still relevant to the CFAA at all?

article thumbnail

You’re a Fool if You Think You Can Win a 512(f) Case–Security Police and Fire Professionals v. Maritas

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Construing these allegations as true and in Service’s favor, Service subjectively believed that he possessed an ownership interest and that he never approved the Comedy Dynamics deal. I’m pretty sure the drafters of 512(f) never contemplated that it would be invoked in disputes over ownership.

Fair Use 108
article thumbnail

512(f) Plaintiff Must Pay $91k to the Defense–Digital Marketing v. McCandless

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Benjamin. * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017? Universal. * Two 512(f) Rulings Where The Litigants Dispute Copyright Ownership. * It Takes a Default Judgment to Win a 17 USC 512(f) Case–Automattic v. Summit Entertainment. * Cease & Desist Letter to iTunes Isn’t Covered by 17 USC 512(f)–Red Rock v.

article thumbnail

Anti-Circumvention Takedowns Aren’t Covered by 512(f)–Yout v. RIAA

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Benjamin. * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017? Universal. * Two 512(f) Rulings Where The Litigants Dispute Copyright Ownership. * It Takes a Default Judgment to Win a 17 USC 512(f) Case–Automattic v. Summit Entertainment. * Cease & Desist Letter to iTunes Isn’t Covered by 17 USC 512(f)–Red Rock v.