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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 38

Limited damages available under DMCA 512(f) for wrongful takedown notice
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2010

Although DMCA 512(f) allows an award of "any damages" for wrongful removal of alleged infringing material as a result of misrepresentations to a service provider, such damages "must be proximately caused by the misrepresentation to the service provider and the service provider's reliance on the misrepresentation," a district court ruled


Addition of introduction and forwarding of defamatory e-mail protected from liability under CDA Section 230
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2010

The recipient of a defamatory e-mail who forwarded it to other parties with a brief introduction is protected from liability for defamation by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a panel of the California Court of Appeal ruled


CDA Section 230 protects web site operator from liability for user's defamatory post, despite general statement on web site concerning accuracy of information
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2010

A general statement on a Web site to the effect that posted information was truthful and accurate did not deprive the Web site operators of protection from liability for defamatory statements posted by third parties under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a Texas appeals court ruled


Web site owner's assertion of CDA Section 230 in response to defamation claim not an extortionate threat
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2010

A Web site operator's assertion of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in response to a demand that allegedly defamatory third-party content be removed from its consumer complaint site does not constitute an extortionate threat under California law, a district court ruled


Mobile carriers not secondarily liable for copyright infringement on multimedia messaging system
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

Mobile carriers are not liable for inducing infringement of copyright on their multimedia messaging system because they did not design the system with the object of promoting infringement, nor did they take any specific, affirmative steps to actively encourage or induce infringement by users of the system, a district court ruled in a copyright infringement action brought by a producer of multimedia messaging content


No CDA 230 protection for online booksellers for internet sale of book
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

While online booksellers are immune under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act for defamation claims arising out of promotional material supplied by third parties and posted on the booksellers' sites, Section 230 does not extend to defamation claims arising out of the books themselves, a district court ruled


CDA Section 230 protects online business review site from liability for refusing to remove negative reviews
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects the provider of an online business review site from liability for refusing to remove negative reviews, a district court ruled


Posting entire news article on nonprofit organization's blog constitutes fair use
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

The re-posting of an entire news article on the blog of a nonprofit organization is fair use as a matter of law where the purpose was to educate the public, a district court ruled


Google Books settlement would usurp congressional role in revising copyright law
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

Judge Chin found that the settlement was not "fair, adequate and reasonable," as required by the federal rules, and suggested that it might be able to be approved if it was changed to an opt-in, rather than an opt-out, settlement


CDA 230 protects blog owner from liability for third-party comment
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2011

The court ruled the owner of a blog is not liable for an alleged defamatory comment even if the owner viewed and approved the comment prior to publication on the blog