Remove Download Remove Hearing Remove Lawsuit
article thumbnail

Serial Copyright Plaintiff Lacks Standing to Enforce Third-Party Copyrights–Viral DRM v 7News

Eric Goldman

It claims that 7News Australia downloaded videos from YouTube, stripped out the copyright management information (CMI), and incorporated the videos into its own videos that it uploaded to YouTube. Based on this ruling, Viral DRM’s earlier SAD Scheme lawsuit also may have been deficient on copyright standing grounds. Emoji GmbH v.

article thumbnail

2024 Internet Law Year-in-Review

Eric Goldman

9) Supreme Court Tamps Down on Jawboning and Government Social Media Lawsuits. Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear the TikTok ban, and Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear Free Speech Coalition v. If any of those lawsuits succeed, they pose a potential existential threat to the entire industry. Pixel Cases.

Law 102
professionals

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Automating web compliance is much easier than we believe

Global LegalTech Hub

This workload even makes teams neglect and put compliance aside while focusing on other processes, leading to potential lawsuits and penalties. For example, captures hosted in Stillio can be shared through a private link, downloaded as a.jpg file, or linked to your drive of choice like Dropbox.

article thumbnail

N.D. Cal. Judge Pushes Back on Copyright SAD Scheme Cases–Viral DRM v. YouTube Schedule A Defendants

Eric Goldman

“Plaintiff alleges Defendants downloaded and copied Plaintiff’s copyrighted materials from YouTube, and then re-uploaded infringing versions of Plaintiff’s copyrighted media content to their YouTube channels.” In other words, the court could have–AND SHOULD HAVE–called out these issues during the ex parte TRO hearing.

article thumbnail

Thomas Suh and Ken Block on How LegalMation is Revolutionizing Litigation Efficiency (TGIR Ep. 222)

3 Geeks and a Law Blog

The flagship product automates drafting responses to lawsuits, discovery requests, demand letters, and more by leveraging a firm’s historical data. And then kind of looking at, you know, the typical story that we hear of a lot of tech companies, as they, you know, identify a discrete problem, but I want to twist it just a little bit.

Litigator 147
article thumbnail

Section 230 Immunizes Snap, Even if It’s “Inherently Dangerous”–L.W. v. Snap

Eric Goldman

By definition, Snap’s failure to remove CSAM distributed on Snapchat by third parties, and Apple’s and Google’s choice to allow Snapchat to remain available for download in their online stores, involve “reviewing. and deciding whether to publish or to withdraw from publication third-party content.” ” Third-Party Content. Craigslist ).

article thumbnail

Section 230 Preempts FOSTA Claim–Doe v. WebGroup Czech Republic

Eric Goldman

Here, if the law recognized the illegality of “possessing” illegal content, then the upload could create its own legally recognizable harm even if it’s never meant for, or made available for, downloading. See my post on accidental CSAM downloads. Revenue-Sharing. The court says Section 230 preempts it in this case.