Re: Internet Piracy

On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, C.E. Petit <cepetit[_at_]usa.net> wrote:
>
> I'd like to kick around a couple of situations of internet piracy. I
> want to make certain that I'm pinning the correct people with potential
> liability.
>
> Unfortunately, neither of these is a hypothetical.
>
> (1) Semi-famous author 1 notices, during a web search, that one of her
> short stories generates a hit one an unfamiliar webpage. The webpage
> is hosted by a "free hosting" Service 1, which claims that it will not
> take action against one of its members short of seeing a physical copy
> of a copyright registration. Author 1 has never registered that actual
> story, and does not want it to see print at all, as she feels it is an
> inferior early effort. The actual webpage, though, properly attributes
> the story to author 1, and notes that "some of these stories are posted
> without permission." Further search of the site discloses more
> unauthorized reproduction of work by authors 2, 3, 4, and 5. All email
> links on said site bounce.
>
> Attorney emails to Service 1, informs Service 1 of the continuing and
> admitted violations. After several days of aggressive displays,
> Service 1 backs down and kills the site.
>
> (2) Several months later, Author 2 finds a short article of his posted
> by another user on a different part of Service 1. Author 2 sends email
> to Infringer 2 owner, which itself is through a different "free" email
> provider. Again, the article contains a copyright attribution, but is
> an early work that Author 2 does not wish posted. The email to
> Infringer 2 removes that page. However, Infringer 2 just moves to a
> different "free" service provider (Service 2). Further faxes and
> emails to Infringer 2 and Service 2 finally result in removal from
> THIS website. (It's too early to see if Infringer 2 will open yet
> another site.)
>
> Questions:
>
> (a) In situation 1, did Service 1 lose common carrier status when it
> became aware of an ADMITTED infringement using its service? Should
> Service 1 bear liability because it refuses to accept proof other
> than the physical registration certificate, even though registration
> is not required to protect the copyright?
>
> (b) Service 2 has several "flavors" of sites. If Infringer 2 opens an
> infringing site on one of these other "flavors," is Service 2 willfully
> abetting infringement by failing to screen out either Infringer 2 in
> general, or the infringing material specifically?
>
> I'll hold my thoughts, since I was Attorney in both cases, and had to
> act very quickly.

I would enjoy hearing how this one came out. I think your negotiation skills probably proved more useful than interpretations of the law. for example, in situation 1, you do not describe the monetary harm to your client. Consequently, the failure of obtaining the benefit of a federal registration was probably a critical weakness to your client's case on damages.

-- 

Rod Dixon
rod[_at_]cyberspaces.org
http://www.cyberspaces.org/
<rod[_at_]cyberspaces.org>