Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

WB's Takedown Notices Aimed at Entertainment Co.'s Own Websites

By Jennifer Williams-Alvarez
October 18, 2016

Critics of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) got some ammunition recently, when Warner Bros. Entertainment (WB) asked Google to take down hundreds of copyright-infringing websites ' only to later realize that it had included legitimate sites and some of the entertainment company's own official pages. The blunder dredges up questions about whether the current notice-and-takedown system is working for both copyright owners and service providers.

Section 512 of the DMCA provides the notice-and-takedown process that allows copyright owners, like WB, to protect their works from online infringement. WB, via its hired DMCA agent Vobile, sent a DMCA takedown notice to Google listing over 300 allegedly infringing sites. As tech blog TorrentFreak discovered, legitimate domains were targeted, such as an Amazon page selling WB's The Dark Knight and an official IMDb page for Batman Begins. Also listed were some of WB's own official websites for movies such as The Matrix.

The episode highlights how the DMCA notice-and-takedown process can be used to take down non-infringing content, says Paul Sieminski, general counsel at Automattic, the company behind the online publishing company WordPress. “There's kind of this spray-and-pray effect of sending out a huge volume of notices without any human review,” he says. “In addition to the infringing matches, there's a huge volume of mistakes like in this [WB] one.”

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

"Holy Fair Use, Batman": Copyright, Fair Use and the Dark Knight Image

The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.