Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Failure to Geoblock User Uploads of Movies Isn't Ground for Establishing Personal Jurisdiction Over Web Company
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a novel personal-jurisdiction ruling in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought against the Chinese Internet video-viewing website Youku. Triple Up Ltd. v. Youku Tudou Inc., 16-159. Triple Up claims it owns the exclusive Internet performance rights to three Taiwanese movies that one of its lawyers in the District of Columbia was able to stream from Youku's website. Youku claims: it licensed the right to stream the movies in China; used geoblocking to bar access to the films in the United States; nevertheless removed them from Youku's Chinese website a year ago; and that the movies must have been uploaded by its users. (Youku doesn't use geoblocking to prevent such uploading.) Dismissing the case for lack of specific personal jurisdiction over Youku, District Judge Randolph D. Moss observed: “Because geoblocking technology exists, Triple Up says, it is no longer the case that making a website accessible in the United States is 'an unavoidable side-effect of modern internet technology,' or that basing personal jurisdiction on website accessibility would 'almost always' expose the defendant to suit 'in any forum in the country.' To be sure, the proposition that a website's affirmative geoblocking efforts should weigh against the exercise of personal jurisdiction is unobjectionable. But Triple Up's proposed rule — which equates a failure to geoblock with purposeful availment — would effectively mandate geoblocking for any website operator wishing to avoid suit in the United States … and, indeed, could limit U.S. residents' access to what is appropriately called the World Wide Web. Perhaps, in the future, geoblocking will become sufficiently widespread that a failure to use it will be considered 'purposeful' and assigned jurisdictional significance. But Triple Up provides no factual basis for the [c]ourt to conclude that this is the case now ….” Judge Moss added: “The [c]ourt is unaware of any authority suggesting that a failure to act might constitute purposeful availment.”
*****
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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?
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.