Under the Bridge | The Rise of Copyright Trolls in the Intellectual Property Space; JDSupra, February 6, 2024

Lindsey Mead, Mikhail Murshak, oster Swift Collins & Smith, JDSupra ; Under the Bridge | The Rise of Copyright Trolls in the Intellectual Property Space

"Through tactical litigation practices, copyright trolls rely on copyright law to allege infringement and threaten major statutory damages upon unsuspecting defendants. The term “copyright troll” is an unflattering nickname for someone who manipulates the intellectual property (“IP”) laws to force a “toll” by way of a settlement payout on market participants...

There is hope in the IP legal field that greater copyright protections may come due to the soaring presence of copyright trolls. Notably, there is a pending copyright case before the United States Supreme Court, Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, that will be heard on February 21, 2024. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) has chosen to submit an amicus brief in support of the defendants accused of copyright infringement in that case. Within the brief, EFF alleges that copyright trolling imposes unnecessary costs on affected defendants and limits the exercise of creativity."

‘Copyright Trolls’ Are Suing People Over Creative Commons Photos; PetaPixel, June 1, 2022

MATT GROWCOOT, PetaPixel ; ‘Copyright Trolls’ Are Suing People Over Creative Commons Photos

"An Alleged Copyright “Trap”

Mike Hiestand from SPLC was damning in his condemnation: “let’s call it what is: a trap. And once a user falls into their trap, a demand letter soon follows.

“Unfortunately some photographers and companies are now intentionally taking advantage by including very specific or complex licensing terms that they know most — or at least many — users probably won’t comply with.” 

These “traps” are perfectly legal but appear to be done in bad faith. Users of CC images are strongly advised to read the fine print less they fall foul of one of these demand letters." 

Copyright infringement lawsuits make Indy skyline photo worth a lot more than 1,000 words; IndyStar, May 8, 2018

Mark Alesia, IndyStar; Copyright infringement lawsuits make Indy skyline photo worth a lot more than 1,000 words

"There have been about 200 infringement cases, including two judgments of $150,000 apiece in Bell's favor. Usually, companies or their liability insurance settle the claim. Those who don't settle or don't respond will become part of his steady stream of copyright infringement lawsuits in federal court in Indianapolis. 

Just in higher education, Bell has gone after Indiana University, Purdue University, the University of Indianapolis and Marian University. Even the University of Washington.

"It happened to be a professor on the University of Washington staff that used it," Bell said. "He was promoting a conference he was having in Indianapolis.""

Like these beans? Don’t copy the photo, or you might get a hefty bil; Miami Herald, 12/30/16

David Ovalle, Miami Herald; Like these beans? Don’t copy the photo, or you might get a hefty bill:

"Porn. Poems. Pictures. The internet is awash in them. But more and more, people who download them, or use them on another website, are finding themselves targets of companies demanding money for illegally accessed copyrighted material.

Black bean soup — an innocuous snapshot of a tasty bowl, published on a South Florida health blog —has sparked the latest friction point between a media company and critics who believe these companies are “copyright trolls” unfairly shaking down online users...

Both cases, as well as several recent South Florida lawsuits over digital images, highlight the sometimes fuzzy line between outright trolls and companies genuinely needing to protect intellectual work.

“What makes these companies ‘trolls’ is they don’t seek fair value for the images,” said Oscar Michelen, a New York lawyer who specializes in helping people who receive letters demanding payments for photos. “They demand an excessive amount, threaten a lawsuit and scare you into settling for some lower amount.”

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article123838369.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article123838369.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article123838369.html#storylink=cpy

Yes, It's Fair Use To Mashup Charlie Brown And The Smiths; TechDirt.com, 9/24/13

Mike Masnick, TechDirt.com; Yes, It's Fair Use To Mashup Charlie Brown And The Smiths: "We had mentioned in our post about Universal Music sending bogus DMCA takedowns over Lauren LoPrete's This Charming Charlie tumblr mashup, that LoPrete had been contacted by various copyright and internet free speech lawyers offering to represent her. It appears that among the lawyers reaching out to her were the good folks at Booth Sweet -- whom we've covered many times for their efforts to fight copyright trolls and other bogus threats -- have taken on her case. Lawyer Dan Booth has sent a short and simple counternotice to Tumblr, arguing that the strips that were taken down were covered by fair use."

Copyright troll Righthaven achieves spectacular "fair use" loss; ArsTechnica.com, 3/22/11

Nate Anderson, ArsTechnica.com; Copyright troll Righthaven achieves spectacular "fair use" loss:

"Last Friday, a federal judge ruled in one of the company's many lawsuits, saying that even the complete republication of copyrighted newspaper content can be "fair use."...

At a hearing last week, the judge decided that CIO's use of the full article text was, in fact, a fair use under the "four-factor test" enshrined in law."

EFF to Judge: Watch for Fairness in Mass Copyright Suits; Electronic Frontier Foundation, 2/7/11

Corynne McSherry, Electronic Frontier Foundation; EFF to Judge: Watch for Fairness in Mass Copyright Suits:

"We decided to submit a further brief, because we thought Judge Howell might like to know about various recent developments, such as the fact that federal judges in West Virginia and California have recognized that it is improper to join thousands of people in one lawsuit based solely on the fact that they all allegedly used the same software protocol to share one or more copyrighted works."