This Bill is the Senate version of SOPA and a rewrite of COICA (see below). The Bill would give the US government and copyright holders additional tools to enhance "enforcement against rogue websites operated and registered overseas," which are dedicated to the sale of infringing or counterfeit goods. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the Bill, which was later placed on hold after a wave of protests from civil sopciety and tech industry (see above). See also SOPA & PIPA EFF page
Perfect 10, an adult entertainment magazine providing a subscription-only service online. Third party website publishers posted Perfect 10’s images on their own sites and were searchable on Google, violating Perfect 10’s terms of service as well as copyright. Perfect 10 sued Google for framing and hyperlinking to those websites on their image search service. The Court held Google not liable and Google’s search constituted a fair use of Perfect 10’s images because the use was highly transformative.
Songwriters, music publishers, and motion studios brought copyright infringement action against distributors of a P2P file sharing computer networking software. The Supreme Court held that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.
Record Industry Association of America (“RIAA”) served, Verizon, an Internet Service Provider (ISP) with subpoena under DMCA 512(h), seeking to identify subscribers whom it believed had infringed their members’ copyrights by trading large amount of digital music files via P2P file sharing programs. RIAA filed motion to compel production. The District Court granted RIAA's motion, denied Verizon’s motion to quash and ordered to disclose the identity of the subscribers. The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded with instructions that Verizon is acting as a conduit for p2p file sharing, which does not involve the storage of infringing material on its servers.
Record companies and music publishers brought copyright infringement action against Napster, an Internet service that facilitated the transmission and retention of digital audio files by its users. Circuit judge held injunctive relief was proper to impose duty to provide notice of copyright status upon plaintiffs, duty on service to search for copyrighted works that were subject of notice given by plaintiffs, and courts can require ISPs to use new filtering mechanism.
Creating safe harbors for ISPs against monetary liability for copyright infringing material posted or sent through an intermediary’s system. Unlike §230, DMCA safe harbors don’t prevent suit for injunctive relief against an intermediary nor protect all Internet intermediaries except the four classes of intermediaries: conduit providers such as telephone companies, those who store or cache content hosted by another, and those who host content posted by another, and search engines. Safe harbor is available only to an intermediary that “does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity.” To benefit from the safe harbors, intermediaries must establish, publicize and implement both a notice and...