Re: [Videolib] 9th Circuit rules that Fair Use review must precede DMCA takedowns

[Jessica Rosner]

actually they don't. The decision specifically said that automatic (
i.e algorithms
bots ) do not automatically violate "fair use" if you read the above or
other articles. It was a somewhat stupid case but I doubt it will have any
real legal effect on either how "fair use" is interpreted or automatic take
downs.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Dennis Doros  wrote:

> Surprisingly, a win for small film distributors as well. We never were
> able to get YouTube to put us on the "automatically remove" list because we
> didn't have enough titles for them to consider us proper rights holders.
> (Harrumph!) So I have always had to take down films one by one using my
> best judgement if it was fair use. I'm glad the studios will have to do
> this now too! Though I suspect they will still find a way to make it easier
> for the big companies despite the decision.
>
> Best regards,
> Dennis Doros
> Milestone Film & Video
> PO Box 128 / Harrington Park, NJ 07640
> Phone: 201-767-3117 / Fax: 201-767-3035 / Email: milefi...@gmail.com
>
> Visit our main website!  www.milestonefilms.com
> Visit our new websites!  www.mspresents.com, www.portraitofjason.com,
> www.shirleyclarkefilms.com,
> To see or download our 2014 Video Catalog, click here
> 
> !
>
>
> Support "Milestone Film" on Facebook
>  and Twitter
> !
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Deg Farrelly 
> wrote:
>
>> A win for fair use, for now.
>>
>> deg farrelly
>> Media Librarian/Streaming Video Administrator
>> Arizona State University Libraries
>> Tempe, AZ  85287-1006
>> 602.332.3103
>>
>>
>> Text of Law360 article follows below.
>>
>> https://www.law360.com/articles/702339
>>
>> Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider—in good faith
>> and prior to sending a takedown notification—whether allegedly
>> infringing material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly
>> contemplates as authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That
>> this step imposes responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason
>> for us to reject it.
>>
>> Full text of the opinion (9 pages; PDF) in Lenz vs. Universal Music is
>> available here:
>>
>>
>> https://www.scribd.com/doc/280946517/Opinion-From-United-States-Court-of-Appeals-9th-Circuit-Lenz-vs-Universal-Music
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Fair Use Review Must Precede DMCA Takedowns: 9th Circ.
>>
>> Share us on:
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>   By *Bill
>> Donahue*
>> Law360, New York (September 14, 2015, 11:44 AM ET) -- The Ninth Circuit
>> ruled Monday in a closely watched suit known as the “dancing baby case,”
>> finding copyright owners must consider the fair use doctrine before sending
>> Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices to online hosts like
>> YouTube.
>>
>> Siding with Stephanie Lenz and rights group Electronic Frontier
>> Foundation
>> , the
>> appeals court said copyright owners like Universal Music Group
>>  can only
>> send takedown notices if they’ve come a good faith conclusion that the
>> targeted upload is not a protected fair use of the copyrighted work.
>>
>> If they have not, they can be held liable for damages under the DMCA's
>> Section 512(f) — a provision that bars improper use of the takedown
>> procedure but has barely been enforced by the courts.
>>
>> “Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider — in good faith
>> and prior to sending a takedown notification — whether allegedly infringing
>> material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly contemplates as
>> authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That this step imposes
>> responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason for us to reject it.”
>>
>> Lenz sued in 2007 after UMG sent a takedown notice to YouTube over a
>> 30-second clip she posted of her son dancing to Prince’s “Let’s Go Crazy.”
>> She claimed the video was legal fair use and that the label had thus
>> violated Section 512(f) in its takedown notice by 

[Videolib] 9th Circuit rules that Fair Use review must precede DMCA takedowns

[Deg Farrelly]

A win for fair use, for now.

deg farrelly
Media Librarian/Streaming Video Administrator
Arizona State University Libraries
Tempe, AZ  85287-1006
602.332.3103


Text of Law360 article follows below.

https://www.law360.com/articles/702339

Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider—in good faith
and prior to sending a takedown notification—whether allegedly
infringing material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly
contemplates as authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That
this step imposes responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason
for us to reject it.

Full text of the opinion (9 pages; PDF) in Lenz vs. Universal Music is
available here:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/280946517/Opinion-From-United-States-Court-of-Appeals-9th-Circuit-Lenz-vs-Universal-Music






Fair Use Review Must Precede DMCA Takedowns: 9th Circ.

Share us 
on:
 

  

   By Bill 
Donahue

Law360, New York (September 14, 2015, 11:44 AM ET) -- The Ninth Circuit ruled 
Monday in a closely watched suit known as the “dancing baby case,” finding 
copyright owners must consider the fair use doctrine before sending Digital 
Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices to online hosts like YouTube.

Siding with Stephanie Lenz and rights group Electronic Frontier 
Foundation, 
the appeals court said copyright owners like Universal Music 
Group can only send 
takedown notices if they’ve come a good faith conclusion that the targeted 
upload is not a protected fair use of the copyrighted work.

If they have not, they can be held liable for damages under the DMCA's Section 
512(f) — a provision that bars improper use of the takedown procedure but has 
barely been enforced by the courts.

“Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider — in good faith and 
prior to sending a takedown notification — whether allegedly infringing 
material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly contemplates as 
authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That this step imposes 
responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason for us to reject it.”

Lenz sued in 2007 after UMG sent a takedown notice to YouTube over a 30-second 
clip she posted of her son dancing to Prince’s “Let’s Go Crazy.” She claimed 
the video was legal fair use and that the label had thus violated Section 
512(f) in its takedown notice by knowingly misrepresenting the video was an 
unauthorized use of a copyrighted work.

The case was closely watched from both sides. Lenz and EFF said a win would 
provide a needed counterbalance to overly aggressive takedown notices from 
large media companies. Universal and other media firms, on the other hand, said 
the DMCA’s takedown system already overburdens them and the system can't 
function as designed if they're required to look into fair use each time they 
send a notice.

Though the court said Monday that companies like Universal need to consider 
fair use, it also noted that it was “mindful of pressing crush of voluminous 
infringing content that copyright holders face in a digital age” and that the 
process for checking for fair use “need not be searching or intensive.”

“We note, without passing judgment, that the implementation of computer 
algorithms appears to be a valid and good faith middle ground for processing a 
plethora of content while still meeting the DMCA’s requirements to somehow 
consider fair use,” the court wrote.

When a company doesn’t meet those requirements, the court said, an aggrieved 
party can pursue a claim that the copyright owner violated Section 512(f) by 
“knowingly misrepresenting” that it had a good faith belief that the work was 
infringing.

The court also ruled that a litigant like Lenz can recover nominal damages when 
such a claim is successful — another point of contention in the case. The panel 
left to a jury, however, the question of whether she actually deserved damages 
or attorneys fees.

“Today’s ruling sends a strong message that copyright law does not authorize 
thoughtless censorship of lawful speech,” said Corynne McSherry, the EFF's 
legal director who argued on behalf of Lenz at the Ninth Circuit. 

Re: [Videolib] 9th Circuit rules that Fair Use review must precede DMCA takedowns

[Dennis Doros]

Surprisingly, a win for small film distributors as well. We never were able
to get YouTube to put us on the "automatically remove" list because we
didn't have enough titles for them to consider us proper rights holders.
(Harrumph!) So I have always had to take down films one by one using my
best judgement if it was fair use. I'm glad the studios will have to do
this now too! Though I suspect they will still find a way to make it easier
for the big companies despite the decision.

Best regards,
Dennis Doros
Milestone Film & Video
PO Box 128 / Harrington Park, NJ 07640
Phone: 201-767-3117 / Fax: 201-767-3035 / Email: milefi...@gmail.com

Visit our main website!  www.milestonefilms.com
Visit our new websites!  www.mspresents.com, www.portraitofjason.com,
www.shirleyclarkefilms.com,
To see or download our 2014 Video Catalog, click here

!


Support "Milestone Film" on Facebook
 and Twitter
!


On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Deg Farrelly  wrote:

> A win for fair use, for now.
>
> deg farrelly
> Media Librarian/Streaming Video Administrator
> Arizona State University Libraries
> Tempe, AZ  85287-1006
> 602.332.3103
>
>
> Text of Law360 article follows below.
>
> https://www.law360.com/articles/702339
>
> Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider—in good faith
> and prior to sending a takedown notification—whether allegedly
> infringing material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly
> contemplates as authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That
> this step imposes responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason
> for us to reject it.
>
> Full text of the opinion (9 pages; PDF) in Lenz vs. Universal Music is
> available here:
>
>
> https://www.scribd.com/doc/280946517/Opinion-From-United-States-Court-of-Appeals-9th-Circuit-Lenz-vs-Universal-Music
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Fair Use Review Must Precede DMCA Takedowns: 9th Circ.
>
> Share us on:
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>   By *Bill
> Donahue*
> Law360, New York (September 14, 2015, 11:44 AM ET) -- The Ninth Circuit
> ruled Monday in a closely watched suit known as the “dancing baby case,”
> finding copyright owners must consider the fair use doctrine before sending
> Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices to online hosts like
> YouTube.
>
> Siding with Stephanie Lenz and rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation
> , the
> appeals court said copyright owners like Universal Music Group
>  can only
> send takedown notices if they’ve come a good faith conclusion that the
> targeted upload is not a protected fair use of the copyrighted work.
>
> If they have not, they can be held liable for damages under the DMCA's
> Section 512(f) — a provision that bars improper use of the takedown
> procedure but has barely been enforced by the courts.
>
> “Copyright holders cannot shirk their duty to consider — in good faith and
> prior to sending a takedown notification — whether allegedly infringing
> material constitutes fair use, a use which the DMCA plainly contemplates as
> authorized by the law,” the appeals court wrote. “That this step imposes
> responsibility on copyright holders is not a reason for us to reject it.”
>
> Lenz sued in 2007 after UMG sent a takedown notice to YouTube over a
> 30-second clip she posted of her son dancing to Prince’s “Let’s Go Crazy.”
> She claimed the video was legal fair use and that the label had thus
> violated Section 512(f) in its takedown notice by knowingly misrepresenting
> the video was an unauthorized use of a copyrighted work.
>
> The case was closely watched from both sides. Lenz and EFF said a win
> would provide a needed counterbalance to overly aggressive takedown notices
> from large media companies. Universal and other media firms, on the other
> hand, said the DMCA’s takedown system already overburdens them and the
> system can't function as designed if they're required to look into fair use
> each time they send a notice.
>
> Though the court