Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Safe Harbor > Notices > CVS Wants to Clip Coupon-Linking Blog (NoticeID 18791) Printer-friendly version

CVS Wants to Clip Coupon-Linking Blog

May 16, 2008

 

Sender Information:
CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
Sent by: [Private]
OpSec Security Group
Boston, MA, 02210, USA

Recipient Information:
[Private]
Google, Inc. [Blogger]


Sent via: email
Re: DMCA Complaint

Dear Copyright agent:

On behalf of CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (?CVS?), I write to notify you of infringements of CVS?s intellectual property rights on your website, Economicendeavors.blogspot.com.

CVS is the owner of the exclusive rights protected under copyright law and other intellectual property rights in CVS coupons. The following link is a specific example of a web page that infringes upon CVS?s intellectual property rights. There are currently 4 unauthorized links to printable CVS coupons on this site?s page. CVS hereby notifies you that the following constitute or incorporate unauthorized excerpts of CVS?s intellectual property, and are infringing and unlawful.

http://economicendeavors.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-cvs-coupons.html

CVS requests that you act expeditiously to remove or disable access to all unauthorized copies of CVS?s intellectual property, including the infringing file identified above. CVS further requests that you destroy any and all unauthorized reproductions of CVS?s intellectual property, or unauthorized portions thereof, within your possession, custody or control, including, any unauthorized reproductions in computerized or digitized form, and cease and desist from further unauthorized reproduction, distribution, publication, archiving, or other exploitation of CVS properties.

The undersigned has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner described herein is not authorized by CVS, its agents, or the law. The information in this notice is accurate. Under penalty of perjury, the undersigned is authorized to act on behalf of CVS with respect to this matter.

Please be advised that this letter is not intended as a complete statement of the facts or law as they pertain to this matter. CVS reserves all rights and remedies.

Sincerely,
[signature]
OpSec Security Group

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: Why does a web host or blogging service provider get DMCA takedown notices?

Answer: Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(c)m a safe-harbor for hosts of "Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users." This safe harbors give providers immunity from liability for users' possible copyright infringement -- if they "expeditiously" remove material when they get complaints. Whether or not the provider would have been liable for infringement by materials its users post, the provider can avoid the possibility of a lawsuit for money damages by following the DMCA's takedown procedure when it gets a complaint. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous.

Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection?

Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions.

In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent's name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)]

Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].


Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)?

Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.

Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.


Question: Does a service provider have to follow the safe harbor procedures?

Answer: No. An ISP may choose not to follow the DMCA takedown process, and do without the safe harbor. If it would not be liable under pre-DMCA copyright law (for example, because it is not contributorily or vicariously liable, or because there is no underlying copyright infringement), it can still raise those same defenses if it is sued.


Question: How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?

Answer: If you believe your material was removed because of mistake or misidentification, you can file a "counter notification" asking the service provider to put it back up. Chilling Effects offers a form to build your own counter-notice.

For more information on the DMCA Safe Harbors, see the FAQs on DMCA Safe Harbor. For more information on Copyright and defenses to copyright infringement, see Copyright.


Topic maintained by Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts