Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Great (Online Copyright) Compromise of 2012
In perhaps the most important online copyright case since the Napster-Aimster-Grokster cases of the early 2000s, the Second Circuit recently issued an opinion in Viacom Int'l, Inc., Football Ass'n Premier League Ltd. v. YouTube, Inc., No. 10-3342-cv (2d Cir. Apr. 5, 2012). The Viacom opinion takes steps to clarify the uncertain scope of the service provider safe harbors under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the “DMCA”). The case involves claims brought by Viacom, among others, alleging massive copyright infringement by YouTube; YouTube has defended its service by seeking refuge in the DMCA's ' 512(c) safe harbor.
Rather than affirm the lower court's grant of full summary judgment in YouTube's favor, the Court of Appeals split the difference. The court held in YouTube's favor on the pivotal issue of whether general awareness of infringing material satisfies ' 512(c)'s knowledge requirements, finding that ' 512(c)(1)(A) requires actual knowledge or awareness of facts or circumstances that indicate specific and identifiable instances of infringement. But the court remanded for a determination of whether, on the record before the court, YouTube either had actual knowledge or was aware of such facts or circumstances. Further, the Second Circuit accepted Viacom's argument that the willful blindness doctrine may be applied in appropriate circumstances to demonstrate knowledge or awareness of specific instances of infringement. While we can imagine that neither side was jumping for joy on its release, the court's opinion does much to safeguard what the court deemed the wide latitude granted service providers in the interest of promoting Internet innovation inherent in the DMCA, while providing the content industry with a potentially powerful weapon.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.