Posts

Bitcoin

BitClout Raises Intellectual Property Concerns

Bitcoin

With the Bitcoin and NFT bubbles continuing to grow, a new crypto-based company has hit the market looking to capitalize on the investment wave. Instead of investing in a business or product, BitClout offers users a new investment option that is described by its owner as a “new type of social network that lets [users] speculate on people and posts with real money.” Backed by some of Silicon Valley’s biggest investors, like Sequoia Capital and Winklevoss Capital, BitClout’s creators hope that it is poised to have a bright future.

However, BitClout is not without controversy over some of its current business practices, some of which may raise intellectual property concerns. To learn more about the possible legal issues posed by BitClout, keep reading this blog.

What Is BitClout?

BitClout users deposit Bitcoin into the platform in exchange for BitClout currency, or creator coins. The value of these coins is based on the reputation or popularity of the celebrity profile the user chooses to invest in. The more popular the profile, the more valuable the creator coin. In theory, if there is a new indie band that a user believes will break into the mainstream, the user can purchase the band’s creator coin now while the cost is low; as the band’s popularity increases, so will the value of the coins the user has purchased.

While users can deposit BitCoin in exchange for BitClout currency, there is currently no way for a user to cash out should they want to do so. The founder of BitClout hopes to have a currency exchange in the future but has no specifics on how or when they will be able to offer a cash-out option. BitClout appears to be a volatile investment, offering the potential for a quick rise and equally quick fall in investment value, with no way for users to cut losses and cash out.

Legal Issues Posed by BitClout

There have been questions raised about the legality of NFTs, cryptocurrency, and related digital assets on the blockchain. One point of controversy surrounding BitClout is their aggressive growth strategy, in which their network was pre-populated with profiles from the top 15,000 public Twitter profiles. Influencers like Kim Kardashian and Elon Musk had profiles created without signing up for or agreeing to the platform. While the founder of BitClout says this was done to prevent user impersonation or handle squatting, the company is currently using the private information of celebrities and influencers without their expressed consent.

One influencer, Brandon Curtis, has already served BitClout founder Nader Al-Naji with a cease-and-desist letter for using his personal information without consent. Curtis is arguing that it is the individual’s right to profit from his or her own identity, and to choose what organizations they collaborate with. Depending on the outcome of Curtis’ intellectual property case, it is possible that many of the other pre-populated profiles on BitClout will also seek to be removed from the platform.

Contact the California Intellectual Property Lawyers at Tauler Smith LLP

Tauler Smith LLP is a Los Angeles law firm that represents clients in intellectual property disputes, including cases involving copyright infringement. If you believe that you are a victim of a copyright violation, or if you have been accused of a copyright violation, our experienced IP attorneys can help you. Call or email us today to discuss your legal options.

DMCA Takedown Notices

Using Section 512(f) to Fight DMCA Takedown Notices

DMCA Takedown NoticesCopyright trolls have become a serious problem in recent years, with more and more people using outdated copyright laws to take advantage of an internet and social media landscape that is constantly changing. Using a decades-old law that pre-dated YouTube (let alone hundreds of thousands of fan sites on Instagram), the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows anyone to send automated notices to social media sites claiming that they own copyrights on content used by certain accounts on the sites. The objective of malicious DMCA trolling is typically to shut down the victim’s social media account. This is most commonly done because of personal jealousy, animosity, and/or retribution. Unfortunately, social media sites and their users are often powerless to do anything about it.

Could there be a new tool in the arsenal of copyright lawyers who look to aggressively defend individuals against fraudulent DMCA takedown notices? Keep reading this blog to find out.

What Is Section 512(f) of the DMCA?

The drafters of the DMCA statute wanted to prevent abuse of the system, which is meant to protect legitimate copyrights. So, they included a subsection called “Section 512(f),” which allows victims to sue if they are served with a DMCA takedown notice that is fraudulent.

Until recently, however, this provision in the law has not been put to good use by copyright defense lawyers. Since the DMCA was enacted in 1998, Section 512(f) has been only a “weak counterpressure on sending DMCA notices,” according to many commentators. In fact, one leading writer stated bluntly, “Section 512(f) of the DMCA is effectively dead.”

Hope for the Future of Section 512(f) as a Tool to Fight Copyright Trolls

Despite the long history of Section 512(f) being largely ineffective at stopping fraudulent DMCA takedown notices from copyright trolls, a recent order from the Central District Court of California has breathed new life into Section 512(f) and provided some measure of hope that victims of DMCA fraud can make dishonest people pay for their misdeeds.

Contact the California Copyright Defense Lawyers at Tauler Smith LLP Today

Have you been served with a DMCA takedown notice? The Los Angeles copyright defense lawyers at Tauler Smith LLP can help you. Contact us anytime by calling 310-590-3927, or by filling out the contact form.

WWD

Why Paper Magazine’s Instagram Account Disappeared

 

If anyone is wondering why Paper Magazine’s Instagram account disappeared, a lawsuit filed against copyright trolls in California federal court might explain why. The suit alleges that the defendants got the publication’s Instagram account disabled and effectively banned as part of an “extortionate strategy” connected to related copyright infringement claims. 

To learn more about the developing case, keep reading this blog.

Paper Magazine Files Lawsuit Alleging Extortion by Copyright Trolls

In a lawsuit filed on July 8, 2020 in U.S. District Court, the magazine’s parent company ENTtech Media Group says it has fallen victim to an scheme by a group of photo companies weaponizing copyright claims to extract a settlement for roughly $1 million. The civil suit alleges that the copyright trolls forced Instagram to take down Paper Magazine’s social media account by sending an overwhelming number of take-down notices related to alleged copyright violations. ENTtech Media argues that the defendants’ strategy was basically an extortion attempt.

Click here to read the full article on WWD.com.

Yahoo!

What Happened to Paper Magazine’s Instagram Account?

Yahoo! recently published an article about a lawsuit that helps to explain exactly why the Paper Magazine Instagram account suddenly disappeared from the internet. The answer is that the account was taken down in response to a different lawsuit alleging copyright infringement. That legal action was initiated by copyright trolls who were looking to pressure Paper Magazine’s parent company, ENTtech Media Group, into paying a quick cash settlement.

Yahoo! Article on Copyright Trolls Weaponizing Lawsuits

The Yahoo! article provides information about how ENTtech Media Group is fighting back against a group of photo companies who allegedly tried to weaponize copyright claims and extract a $1 million settlement. Those copyright trolls have been accused of aggregating several copyright infringement claims related to photos used in Paper Magazine’s Instagram posts. When Paper Magazine’s parent company refused to back down and give in to the threats of legal action, the copyright trolls allegedly inundated Instagram with a large number of take-down requests. This prompted Instagram to shut down the Instagram account as a matter of policy.

ENTtech has now issued a strong response to the “extortionate” tactics used by the copyright trolls.  ENTtech is arguing that the photo companies are taking advantage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and exploiting DMCA protections as a way to extort money from legitimate businesses and copyright holders.

Click here to read the full article on Yahoo! Life.

Instagram Copyright Lawsuits

Can You Get Sued for Posting a Picture of Yourself on Instagram?

 

Instagram Copyright Lawsuits

The popularity of social media has exploded in recent years, with just about everyone having at least one type of social media account. Whether it’s Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, or some other platform, the reality is that social media accounts and interactions are pretty much unavoidable these days. Unfortunately, as more and more people use social media, there is also a greater chance of legal liability because intellectual property rights may be affected. Even paparazzi are filing copyright lawsuits against celebrities who post photos of themselves on Instagram. One question that comes up more than any other in this area of law is: Can you get sued for posting a picture of yourself on Instagram?

To find out whether you can be sued merely for posting a photograph of yourself on Instagram or other social media platforms, keep reading.

Copyright Troll Lawsuits Target Instagram Account Holders

There has been a proliferation of bad-faith lawsuits in California and other states where lawyers claim that the account holders are violating copyright laws. These copyright trolls are typically looking for a quick cash settlement, and they have little intention of ever taking the case to trial. If you are not careful when using social media, you could find yourself named as the defendant in a potentially expensive civil suit. That’s because copyright troll attorneys who scour the internet looking for supposed “copyright violations” won’t just limit their focus to actors, models, and other celebrities who post photographs of themselves on Instagram. The truth is that anyone who uses social media is at risk.

Copyright Troll Richard Liebowitz Sues Amy Schumer, Gigi Hadid, and Kim Kardashian

In the last three months, celebrities Amy Schumer, Gigi Hadid, and Kim Kardashian have all been sued for posting photos of themselves to their Instagram accounts. In each case, the photographer behind the photos in question has alleged that they are the owner and copyright holder of the media, and that the subjects of the photos have no right to post them. Richard Liebowitz, attorney for the plaintiffs in all cases, has filed complaints stating that, “One cannot use photographs without the photographer’s permission, even for social media websites.” The lawsuits involve DMCA takedown notices, as well a demand for monetary damages.

In the lawsuit against Amy Schumer, the plaintiff’s attorney claims that the photographs in question were copyrighted, even though he does not declare the date of the copyright. A search of records maintained by the United States Copyright Office shows that the photographs were copyrighted on February 8, 2020, which is three months after Schumer allegedly infringed on the copyright by posting the photos.

What Is the Best Way to Respond to a Copyright Troll?

Richard Liebowitz Copyright Claims

Richard Liebowitz Refiles and Dismisses Copyright Claim

Richard Liebowitz Copyright Claims

When a plaintiff brings a copyright claim or any other type of lawsuit, there has to be some basis for the legal action. Unfortunately, some lawyers choose to use the threat of a civil suit as leverage to force a cash settlement, even when the case has little or no merit. Courts do not look kindly on this questionable tactic, and they can punish both the plaintiff and their attorney in these cases. Serial copyright litigant Richard Liebowitz recently found this out the hard way when a federal court awarded attorney’s fees against him for his practice of refiling and dismissing copyright claims without prejudice. This case was a good example of why it’s so important to be represented by a skilled attorney who can provide an aggressive defense against copyright claims.

To learn more about the best way to respond to an illegitimate copyright claim, keep reading this blog.

Attorney Richard Liebowitz Accused of Being a Copyright Troll

Richard Liebowitz has been called a “copyright troll” by federal judges based on the volume of lawsuits he has filed. These lawsuits often involve flimsy copyright claims alleging that the defendant has infringed on the plaintiff’s IP rights by publishing a photo or video. In a lot of these cases, the plaintiff may have no intention of actually going to trial. Instead, they simply want to pressure the defendant with the threat of costly litigation in state or federal court so that the defendant will pay a cash settlement. This is not how the law is supposed to work.

Richard Liebowitz Loses PopMatters Copyright Claim

In Glen Craig v. PopMatters Media, Inc. (N.D. Ill.), the defendants raised objections to personal jurisdiction and venue in the Southern District of Illinois. Richard Liebowitz, the attorney representing the plaintiff, then voluntarily dismissed the action and refiled in the Northern District of Illinois. The defendants then filed a motion for attorney’s fees in the first action, as was their right under the law.

The following day, Liebowitz filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in the second action, presumably so that he would not be ordered to pay attorney’s fees in the first action. The defendants again moved for attorney’s fees, and Liebowitz opposed by arguing that no attorney’s fees should be awarded because the dismissal was “without prejudice.” The court did not find Liebowitz’s argument persuasive: in an order dated March 23, 2020, the court granted the defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees against Liebowitz and his client. The court reasoned that “[t]he privilege of dismissing a federal suit without prejudice to refiling may be used only once,” and Liebowitz “used that privilege when he dismissed the Southern District case, so his dismissal of this case operated as a with-prejudice dismissal, an adjudication on the merits.”

Tauler Smith LLP Has History of Defeating Copyright Trolls

The PopMatters order marks yet another legal setback for Richard Liebowitz, who now faces the increased specter of having to pay attorney’s fee awards to the defendants. Tauler Smith LLP is a California law firm that focuses on intellectual property claims, and we have a history of winning Liebowitz’ copyright claims. In fact, our experienced Los Angeles copyright lawyers have previously argued to the Southern District of New York that an award of attorney’s fees in cases brought by Liebowitz would serve dual objectives: (1) protecting our clients’ rights in defense of a dishonest copyright claim, and (2) deterring copyright trolls like Richard Liebowitz from their unrepentant abuse of judicial resources.

The truth is that the U.S. Copyright Act was not created to protect the rights of mercenaries like Richard Liebowitz who threaten law-abiding website operators with DMCA takedown notices and copyright demand letters. The idea behind the federal law was to provide legitimate copyright holders with the ability to file a lawsuit when their intellectual property rights have, in fact, been infringed.

Contact the Los Angeles Copyright Defense Attorneys at Tauler Smith LLP

If you have been sued by Richard Liebowitz or any other copyright trolls, the Los Angeles copyright defense attorneys at Tauler Smith LLP can help you defend your claims. Call 310-590-3927 or email us to schedule a free consultation.