Copyright cease and desist letters are a regular feature of doing business on the Internet. Whether you operate an e-commerce store, a blog, a SaaS platform, or any website that incorporates third-party content—images, text, music, video, software—there is a meaningful chance you will receive one at some point. Understanding what to do when that letter arrives can protect your business, preserve your legal options, and help you resolve the matter efficiently.
A copyright cease and desist letter is a demand from a copyright holder—or more commonly, its attorney—asserting that you are using the copyright holder’s work without authorization. The letter typically identifies the copyrighted work, specifies the allegedly infringing use, demands that you stop the infringing activity, and may demand payment of damages, a licensing fee, or both. Some letters include a deadline for response or compliance.
These letters range from legitimate, well-founded claims to opportunistic demands from copyright owners who overstate the strength of their position in hopes of extracting a quick settlement. Knowing which you are dealing with requires legal analysis—which is why the first and most important step is to consult a copyright attorney.
A copyright cease and desist letter that receives no response tells the sender that you are either indifferent to the claim or hoping it will go away. Neither communicates the message you want. If the claim has merit, ignoring it and continuing to use the allegedly infringing material exposes you to continued damages accumulation and a willfulness finding that dramatically increases your exposure. If the claim lacks merit, ignoring it may result in a lawsuit you could have avoided.
Well-intentioned, self-drafted responses to copyright demands often make the situation worse. Admissions, apologies, and offers to pay that are not carefully framed as settlement negotiations can be used against you in litigation. Responding defensively without understanding your legal position can antagonize a claimant who might otherwise have been willing to resolve the matter for minimal cost.
Do not delete the allegedly infringing material from your servers, emails, or backups. Preserve all documentation showing how you obtained, licensed, or created the material at issue. This documentation may be your most important evidence—it can establish that you had a valid license, that the material was obtained in good faith, or that the copyright holder’s claim is factually incorrect.
A copyright attorney will evaluate the available defenses against the claim. Common defenses include:
If you have a license to use the work—express or implied—that license is a complete defense to the extent your use falls within its scope. Stock photo licenses, creative commons licenses, platform terms of service, and custom licensing agreements all create license rights that can defeat an infringement claim. Review your documentation carefully.
Fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107 permits certain uses of copyrighted material without authorization—commentary, criticism, news reporting, scholarship, parody, and transformative uses. The analysis is fact-specific and turns on the four fair use factors. An attorney can assess whether your use qualifies.
Not all works are protected by copyright. Works that lack originality, works in the public domain, works whose copyright has expired, and works created by the federal government are not protected. If the work at issue does not meet the requirements for copyright protection, no infringement can occur.
Copyright infringement claims are subject to a three-year statute of limitations. 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). Claims based on infringement that occurred more than three years before the demand letter may be time-barred, depending on when the copyright holder knew or should have known of the infringement.
To recover statutory damages and attorney’s fees, the copyright holder must have registered the work before the infringement or within three months of first publication. 17 U.S.C. § 412. If the work was not timely registered, the claimant is limited to actual damages—often a modest amount that changes the economics of the dispute significantly.
An attorney’s response to a copyright cease and desist letter should accomplish several things: acknowledge receipt; reserve all rights and defenses; evaluate the claim without making admissions; and set a professional, non-confrontational tone that keeps the door open to resolution. If the claim has merit, the response may initiate settlement negotiations. If the claim lacks merit, the response may put the copyright holder on notice that pursuing the matter further would be unwise.
Revision Legal handles copyright cease and desist matters regularly—both for businesses that receive demand letters and for copyright owners who need to send them. Our attorneys move quickly, give you practical advice about your actual exposure, and protect your business while preserving your rights. Contact us today for a consultation.
A copyright cease-and-desist letter typically demands that the recipient immediately stop using the claimant’s copyrighted work, remove or destroy all infringing copies, provide a written confirmation of compliance, and — in some cases — pay a settlement or license fee to resolve the claim. Before responding, you have several options that an intellectual property attorney can help you evaluate.
Comply and remove. If the claim is valid — the work is protected, you used it without authorization, and no defense applies — prompt removal and a written acknowledgment of compliance often ends the matter without litigation. Many copyright owners send cease-and-desist letters as a first step and have no immediate intention to sue if the infringement stops. However, compliance without a written release does not guarantee that the claimant will not seek damages for past infringement.
Negotiate a license. If you want to continue using the work, a negotiated license agreement — rather than a lawsuit — may be the most cost-effective outcome. An attorney can open a dialogue with the copyright owner’s counsel, assess the realistic value of a license for the specific use at issue, and draft terms that provide ongoing rights in exchange for a one-time or royalty payment.
Assert defenses. If you have a viable defense — fair use, license, independent creation, public domain, or statute of limitations — you can respond by setting forth the legal basis for your position. A well-crafted response letter that articulates your defense may persuade the claimant to withdraw the demand without litigation. It may also set up your defenses for a subsequent court proceeding if the claimant sues.
Fair use. The four-factor fair use analysis under 17 U.S.C. § 107 is the most frequently invoked defense. Transformative uses that add new meaning, criticism, commentary, or parody carry significant weight under the first factor, and uses that do not harm the market for the original work fare well under the fourth factor. No use is automatically fair use, and a court will apply all four factors to the specific facts.
License. Creative Commons licenses, terms of service on stock photo platforms, and express contractual licenses all may authorize uses that would otherwise be infringing. License scope is critical — a license to “use on your website” may not cover commercial print reproductions, and a license for personal use does not cover commercial applications. An attorney can review the license terms to determine whether the accused use falls within scope.
Registration and damages limitations. Even if infringement occurred, a copyright owner who did not register the work before infringement began — or within three months of first publication — cannot recover statutory damages or attorney’s fees. This limitation under 17 U.S.C. § 412 significantly limits the economic stakes of many cease-and-desist demands and can dramatically alter the settlement calculus.
Mercedes-Benz was sued for featuring street art in a photo shoot without permission under the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act. Here’s what the case decided.
Read more about Street Art, Architectural Copyright, and Mercedes
eSports tournaments and streaming raise complex copyright questions around game footage, broadcasts, and player likenesses. Here’s how copyright law applies in competitive gaming.
Read more about Copyright Infringement and eSports
VR developers face uncharted copyright territory around virtual environments, user-generated content, and real-world replications. Here’s how existing copyright law applies to VR.
Read more about Virtual Reality and Copyright Law for Developers