We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 103

Not all fun and games in copycat litigation

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 11 2014

The gaming industry (and gamers) will be watching two recent US cases with great anticipation. In these cases, law suits have been brought against

You twit face! Protecting your IP in the world of YouTube, Twitter and Facebook: a practical protection guide for the IP owner

  • Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 22 2010

Social media sites such as YouTube, Twitter and Facebook present significant opportunities for individuals and businesses to communicate with extensive numbers of people in ways never before envisioned

DMCA "safe harbor" protection upheld for YouTube notwithstanding generalized knowledge of infringement

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 29 2010

A United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently found that YouTube was entitled to "safe harbor" protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) against all of Viacom's direct and secondary copyright infringement claims

Barclays Capital Inc., et al. v. Theflyonthewall.com

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 24 2010

After a bench trial, the district court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff financial institutions on their claims of copyright infringement and "hot news misappropriation" against online aggregator of financial information

UMG v. Augusto: allowing the sale of promotional CDs under the first sale doctrine could affect much more than the music industry

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 17 2008

In a decision that could have far-reaching implications for technology licenses of all types, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently held that the first sale doctrine permits a recipient of promotional CDs to sell them online without violating the license pursuant to which the CDs were distributed and without being liable for copyright infringement

Winston wins victory for Veoh in copyright infringement lawsuit

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 18 2009

A federal court recently affirmed that Veoh Networks, an online video Web site, qualified for safe-harbor protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"

Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 24 2010

Court grants summary judgment for YouTube and Google in copyright infringement action for large amount of copyrighted material on website, holding that defendants are entitled to the DMCA 512(c) safe harbor because they had insufficient notice of the particular infringements

Google class action settlement: are you in or are you out?

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 23 2009

If you are a copyright owner, author or publisher, there’s a very good chance your rights may be affected by the proposed settlement agreement in the class action lawsuit against Google

Viacom v. YoutubeGoogle: judge swats billion-dollar copyright lawsuit; Viacom to appeal summary judgment ruling

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 24 2010

A federal district court granted summary judgment to YouTube and Google yesterday, holding that a safe harbor of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) protected the video-upload giants against billiondollar claims brought by Viacom International and other content holders

Cabell v. Zimmerman

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 24 2010

Defendant’s improper takedown notice did not constitute copyright infringement where plaintiff alleged no affirmative copying of its work and defendant’s failure to investigate independently whether a video was infringing prior to sending the takedown notice did not constitute misrepresentation under 17 U.S.C. 512(f