Remove 2017 Remove Cease and Desist Remove Contracts Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

You’re a Fool if You Think You Can Win a 512(f) Case–Security Police and Fire Professionals v. Maritas

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Construing these allegations as true and in Service’s favor, Service subjectively believed that he possessed an ownership interest and that he never approved the Comedy Dynamics deal. I’m pretty sure the drafters of 512(f) never contemplated that it would be invoked in disputes over ownership.

Fair Use 103
article thumbnail

Once Again, LinkedIn Can’t Use CFAA To Stop Unwanted Scraping–hiQ v. LinkedIn

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

LinkedIn lawsuit started in 2017. The court remains skeptical of LinkedIn’s privacy-based arguments: LinkedIn has no protected property interest in the data contributed by its users, as the users retain ownership over their profiles. Are robots.txt, IP address blocks, or cease-and-desist letters still relevant to the CFAA at all?

article thumbnail

A 512(f) Plaintiff Wins at Trial! ??–Alper Automotive v. Day to Day Imports

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Benjamin. * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017? Universal. * Two 512(f) Rulings Where The Litigants Dispute Copyright Ownership. * It Takes a Default Judgment to Win a 17 USC 512(f) Case–Automattic v. Summit Entertainment. * Cease & Desist Letter to iTunes Isn’t Covered by 17 USC 512(f)–Red Rock v.