In a strange copyright infringement case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that MMS, the text messaging standard, is not an illegal file sharing service and, therefore, cell phone carriers cannot be held liable for vicarious copyright infringement for the forwarding of copyrighted MMS messages. Luvdart, a company that produces greetings and stylized messages containing video, photos, and audio, alleged that Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint could be held liable for profiting from the facilitation of the copyright infringement of Luvdart’s copyrighted messages. In short, Luvdart alleged that these carriers allowed users to forward Luvdart’s copyrighted MMS messages to third parties in violation of Luvdart’s copyright license agreement.
A three judge panel of the 9th Circuit ruled that Luvdart failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and upheld the lower court’s decision to dismiss the case. In affirming the lower court’s dismissal of the case, the 9th Circuit held that Luvdart failed to show that the carriers had specific knowledge that copyright infringement occurred on their respective networks. Specifically, the Court stated, “Luvdarts’s conclusory allegations that the Carriers had the required knowledge of infringement are plainly insufficient.” The Court also rejected Luvdart’s argument that the carriers were responsible for “willful blindness,” namely, that they took specific actions to avoid learning about infringement on their networks. And the Court took issue with validity of Luvdart’s purported notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act: “The notices were 150-page-long lists of titles, apparently just a transcription of every title copyrighted by Luvdarts, which indicated that they wanted “accountability” for the unauthorized distribution of those titles for the period from May 2008 to November 2009.”
What does this mean for you? Simply put, your phone carrier will not be held liable for copyright infringement simply because it allows users to forward MMS messages.
The answer to this question is complex and nuanced. In the last decade or so, it has become fashionable to insist there is some stark dichotomy between what a trademark is and what a brand is. But the difference is not as stark as some marketers would like you to believe. The traditional definition of […]
Read more about Is a “Trademark” the Same Thing as a “Brand”?
The Circle R and the TM symbols both relate to trademarks and both can be physically placed on products, packaging, advertising materials, websites, etc. The Circle R symbol is an “R” enclosed in a circle (®). While both are trademark-related symbols, there are different eligibility requirements for use, meanings, and implications. Here is a quick […]
Read more about Trademarks: What is the Difference Between the Circle R and TM Symbols?
E-commerce businesses must comply with federal and State-level advertising laws and regulations. This is true of any business. But e-commerce businesses face special challenges because there is a whole array of potential methods of innocently, accidentally, or intentionally violating advertising laws. These include the potential to engage in false and deceptive advertising practices, such as […]
Read more about Is Your E-Commerce Advertising in Compliance With Existing Laws?