Cease and Desist Copying Litigation Ownership 
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
AUGUST 16, 2023
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. The litigants are an employer and former employee.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
MARCH 6, 2022
” With respect to whether Babybus’ baby character infringed Moonbug’s baby, Babybus claimed that the alleged copying related to generic features found in nature. . Day to Day Imports. * Satirical Depiction in YouTube Video Gets Rough Treatment in Court. * 512(f) Preempts Tortious Interference Claim–Copy Me That v.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
MARCH 15, 2022
The court says the takedown notices are covered by the litigation privilege: “Since the statements at issue here were made to Amazon during the notice and takedown period, they are absolutely privileged. So extending the litigation privilege to DMCA takedown notices seems like an overreach. Defamation. Alper Automotive v.
Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog
JANUARY 16, 2024
These rights provide exclusive ownership and control over intangible assets, allowing creators to protect their innovations from unauthorised use, reproduction, or distribution. Startups can secure copyrights to prevent unauthorized copying or distribution of their creative works. What are Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs)?
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
MAY 2, 2022
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. Five years into this litigation, let’s take stock of all of the things we still don’t know: Is hiQ still an operational business?
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
NOVEMBER 30, 2023
Allegedly on behalf of Barrett, an SEO vendor sent DMCA takedown notices to Google, alleging that Source Capital had copied some of Barrett’s copyrighted material. Prior Posts on Section 512(f) * 512(f) Once Again Ensnared in an Employment Ownership Dispute–Shande v. Hawai‘i Aug. Zoox * Surprise! Alper Automotive v.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
DECEMBER 5, 2022
Day to Day Imports. * Satirical Depiction in YouTube Video Gets Rough Treatment in Court. * 512(f) Preempts Tortious Interference Claim–Copy Me That v. 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. Alper Automotive v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
64 
Let's personalize your content