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
Stanford Center for Internet & Society
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Derivative Works > Notices > First Notice of Infringement and Declaration (NoticeID 1068, http://chillingeffects.org/N/1068) Location: https://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1068

January 29, 2004

 

Sender Information:
Warner Brothers Records via GrayZone Inc.
Sent by: [Private]
[Private]
Burbank, CA, US

Recipient Information:
[Private]
[Private]
Canada


Sent via: email
Re: First Notice of Infringement and Declaration

FIRST NOTICE OF INFRINGEMENT AND DECLARATION

To: webmaster@[private]

AND

[Private]


I, the undersigned, do solemnly and sincerely declare and CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY that:

1. I am the owner or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner of certain intellectual property rights, said owner being named [Private] ("IP Owner").

2. I have a good faith belief that the materials identified in the addendum below are not authorized by the above IP Owner, its agent, or the law and therefore infringe the IP Owner's rights according to the laws of the (check all that apply):

United States
Australia
Canada
EUR
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
United Kingdom
All of the above X

Please act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material or items claimed to be infringing.

3. I may be contacted at:

Printed Name: [Private]
Title: Consultant
Company: Warner Bros. Records, Inc.
Address: [Private]

Email (correspondence): [Private]
Telephone: [Private]

You should understand that this letter constitutes notice to you that the sale and/or other distribution of this product is unauthorized. This letter
does not constitute a waiver of any right to recover damages incurred by virtue of any such unauthorized activities, and such rights as well as
claims for other relief are expressly retained.

Finally, notwithstanding our use of this required notice form, we believe that www.[Private].com activities and services fall outside the scope of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Our use of this form is meant to facilitate www.[Private].com removal of the infringing
items listed below and is not meant to suggest or imply that www.[Private].com activities and services are within the scope of the DMCA.

I make this declaration conscientiously, believing it to be true and correct, and in accordance with the laws of each of the countries listed
above. I am aware and agree that the contents of this statement may be relied upon against me in any court or arbitration proceeding.

Truthfully,

[Private]
DIGITAL SIGNATURE/VERISIGN


Date: Janurary 29, 2004

Addendum to Notice of Infringement:

List of Allegedly Infringing Items Or Materials

Name of Intellectual Property Owner: WARNER BROS. RECORDS, INC.

Infringed Work or Right

A U D I O

Page Hits: 117,186

Prodigy VS Enya - New Aged SMBU (Apeboy Mix)3,807MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Manual Motiv - Enya Remixture3,921MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Magnetic Pulstar - Rave Mission Volume VII (CD 2) - 01 - Secret Love [Extended] (Enya Boadicea Remix)12,453MP3Audio SingleUnofficialremix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Enya vs Marcelo Guerra - Orinoco Flow (Paint The Sky Club Mix)7,501MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

The Lord of the Rings [Static Project Remix]12,545MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

The Lord Of The Rings [Novacane Remix]8,503MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Storms In Africa [Remix]2,912MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Spirit of Eden - The Sun the Moon and the Stars - 09 - Orinoco Flow6,024MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Session3 - Music for Dance by DJ Don Bishop - Caribbean Blue [Don Bishop Mix]11,237MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Pax Deorum (Fobia Dnb Remix)5,964MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow [White Label House Mix]4,027MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow [Thunderpuss Cory Mix 2000]8,183MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow [Techno Remix]3,809MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow [Marcelo Trance Radio Edit]3,325MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow 2000 (Cory Activate's Circuit Bump Mix)12,647MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow (White Label House Mix)3,432MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow (Thunderpuss 2000 Mix)12,641MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow (Rave Remix)4,742MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow (Edit)4,403MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Orinoco Flow (Dance Remix)5,406MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time [Project D Ulterior Motive Mix]10,191MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time [Mixman Mike Dream Spiral Club Mix]8,996MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time [Danny Morris Mix]6,087MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time (WTC US Radio Mix)3,330MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time (New Generation Remix By Dj Kuba)5,806MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time (Dance Remix) - Project D Ulterior Motive Mix10,191MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time (Ashleigh Remix)5,579MP3Audio SingleUnofficial remix/mashup/etc.8/24/2003

Only Time (Andr

FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: What does the "reservation of rights" language mean? What are they "waiving" at me?

Answer: Many C&Ds will say something like, "This letter shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any rights or remedies, which are expressly reserved." This is just legalese for saying, "Even if you do what we ask in this letter, we can still sue you later." The language is standard; do not be alarmed. Litigation is extremely unpleasant, and unless your opponent is irrational (always a distinct possibility, of course), it will not bring litigation after it has obtained what it wants.


[back to notice text]


Question: Is a cease-and-desist letter confidential?

Answer: There is ordinarily no expectation of privacy or confidentiality in a letter sent to an adversary. Unless you have made a specific promise of confidentiality beforehand, such as in a protective agreement or NDA, a letter demanding confidentiality doesn't bind you.


[back to notice text]


Question: What defines a service provider under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)?

Answer: A service provider is defined as "an entity offering transmission, routing, or providing connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received" or "a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities thereof." [512(k)(1)(A-B)] This broad definition includes network services companies such as Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, bulletin board system operators, and even auction web sites. In A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster Inc., the court refused to extend the safe harbor provisions to the Napster software program and service, leaving open the question of whether peer-to-peer networks also qualify for safe harbor protection under Section 512.

There are four major categories of network systems offered by service providers that qualify for protection under the safe harbor provisions:

  • Conduit Communications include the transmission and routing of information, such as an email or Internet service provider, which store the material only temporarily on their networks. [Sec. 512(a)]
  • System Caching refers to the temporary copies of data that are made by service providers in providing the various services that require such copying in order to transfer data. [Sec. 512(b)]
  • Storage Systems refers to services which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service or a chat room. [Sec. 512(c)]
  • Information Location Tools refer to services such as search engines, directories, or pages of recommended web sites which provide links to the allegedly infringing material. [Sec. 512(d)]


[back to notice text]


Question: What does "under penalty of perjury" mean?

Answer: Law.com offers a good definition of perjury: "Perjury is the the crime of intentionally lying after being duly sworn (to tell the truth) by a notary public, court clerk or other official. This false statement may be made in testimony in court, administrative hearings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, as well as by signing or acknowledging a written legal document (such as affidavit, declaration under penalty of perjury, deed, license application, tax return) known to contain false information. Although it is a crime, prosecutions for perjury are rare, because a defendant will argue he/she merely made a mistake or misunderstood."


[back to notice text]


Question: Does a cease and desist letter recipient have a duty to remove materials alleged to infringe copyright?

Answer: The cease and desist letter gives its recipient ("you") notice that someone is claiming something you've done or something on your site infringes a copyright. If the materials that are the subject of the notice are in fact infringing, then you do have a duty to remove them, although there may be statutory provisions (DMCA Safe Harbor) that protect you from a lawsuit if the materials were posted by someone else. You may have to give the poster notice of the complaint.

If you do not believe that the materials are infringing, or if you believe that you are making fair use of the materials, you may choose to take the risk of not removing the materials, but a lawsuit might follow in which the complainer tries to prove they they are right and you are wrong. If the accuser obtains a court order, then you must take down the materials.


[back to notice text]


Question: Does a copyright owner have to specify the exact materials it alleges are infringing?

Answer: Proper notice under the safe harbor provisions requires the copyright owners to specifically identify the alleged infringing materials, or if the service provider is an "information location tool" such as a search engine, to specifically identify the links to the alleged infringing materials. [512(c)(3)(iii)], [512(d)(3)]. The provisions also require the copyright owners to identify the copyrighted work, or a representative list of the copyrighted works, that is claimed to be infringed. [512(c)(3)(A)(ii)]. Rather than simply sending a letter to the service provider that claims that infringing material exists on their system, these qualifications ensure that service providers are given a reasonable amount of information to locate the infringing materials and to effectively police their networks. [512(c)(3)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(3)].

However, in the recent case of ALS Scan, Inc. v. Remarq Communities, Inc., the court found that the copyright owner did not have to point out all of the infringing material, but only substantially all of the material. The relaxation of this specificity requirement shifts the burden of identifying the material to the service provider, raising the question of the extent to which a service provider must search through its system. OSP customers should note that this situation might encourage OSP's to err on the side of removing allegedly infringing material.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the notice and takedown procedures for web sites?

Answer: In order to have an allegedly infringing web site removed from a service provider's network, or to have access to an allegedly infringing website disabled, the copyright owner must provide notice to the service provider with the following information:

  • The name, address, and electronic signature of the complaining party [512(c)(3)(A)(i)]
  • The infringing materials and their Internet location [512(c)(3)(A)(ii-iii)], or if the service provider is an "information location tool" such as a search engine, the reference or link to the infringing materials [512(d)(3)].
  • Sufficient information to identify the copyrighted works [512(c)(3)(A)(iv)].
  • A statement by the owner that it has a good faith belief that there is no legal basis for the use of the materials complained of [512(c)(3)(A)(v)].
  • A statement of the accuracy of the notice and, under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on the behalf of the owner [512(c)(3)(A)(vi)].

Once notice is given to the service provider, or in circumstances where the service provider discovers the infringing material itself, it is required to expeditiously remove, or disable access to, the material. The safe harbor provisions do not require the service provider to notify the individual responsible for the allegedly infringing material before it has been removed, but they do require notification after the material is removed.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions?

Answer: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is the latest amendment to copyright law, which introduced a new category of copyright violations that prohibit the "circumvention" of technical locks and controls on the use of digital content and products. These anti-circumvention provisions put the force of law behind any technological systems used by copyright owners to control access to and copying of their digital works.

The DMCA contains four main provisions:

  1. a prohibition on circumventing access controls [1201(a)(1)(A)];
  2. an access control circumvention device ban (sometimes called the "trafficking" ban) [1201(a)(2)];
  3. a copyright protection circumvention device ban [1201(b)]; and,
  4. a prohibition on the removal of copyright management information (CMI) [1202(b)].

The first provision prohibits the act of circumventing technological protection systems, the second and third ban technological devices that facilitate the circumvention of access control or copy controls, and the fourth prohibits individuals from removing information about access and use devices and rules. The first three provisions are also distinguishable in that the first two provisions focus on technological protection systems that provide access control to the copyright owner, while the third provision prohibits circumvention of technological protections against unauthorized duplication and other potentially copyright infringing activities.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is copyright infringement? Are there any defenses?

Answer: Infringement occurs whenever someone who is not the copyright holder (or a licensee of the copyright holder) exercises one of the exclusive rights listed above.

The most common defense to an infringement claim is "fair use," a doctrine that allows people to use copyrighted material without permission in certain situations, such as quotations in a book review. To evaluate fair use of copyrighted material, the courts consider four factors:


  1. the purpose and character of the use
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work
  3. the amount and substantiality of copying, and
  4. the market effect.

(17 U.S.C. 107)

The most significant factor in this analysis is the fourth, effect on the market. If a copier's use supplants demand for the original work, then it will be very difficult for him or her to claim fair use. On the other hand, if the use does not compete with the original, for example because it is a parody, criticism, or news report, it is more likely to be permitted as "fair use."

Trademarks are generally subject to fair use in two situations: First, advertisers and other speakers are allowed to use a competitor's trademark when referring to that competitor's product ("nominative use"). Second, the law protects "fair comment," for instance, in parody.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the possible penalties for copyright infringement?

Answer: Under the Copyright Act, penalties for copyright infringement can include:

  1. an injunction against further infringement -- such as an order preventing the infringer from future copying or distribution of the copyrighted works
  2. impounding or destruction of infringing copies
  3. damages -- either actual damages and the infringer's profits, or statutory damages
  4. costs and attorney's fees

A copyright owner can only sue for infringement on a work whose copyright was registered with the Copyright Office, and can get statutory damages and attorney's fees only if the copyright registration was filed before infringement or within three months of first publication. (17 U.S.C. 411 and 412)


[back to notice text]


Question: What is a "Permanent Injunction"?

Answer: An injunction is "A court order commanding or preventing an action. * To get an injunction, the complainant must show that there is no plain, adequate, and complete remedy at law and that an irreparable injury will result unless the relief is granted... [A]permanent injunction [is] [a]n injunction granted after a final hearing on the merits. * Despite its name, a permanent injunction does not necessarily last forever."


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?

Answer: The DMCA, as it is known, has a number of different parts. One part is the anticircumvention provisions, which make it illegal to "circumvent" a technological measure protecting access to or copying of a copyrighted work (see Anticircumvention (DMCA)). Another part gives web hosts and Internet service providers a "safe harbor" from copyright infringement claims if they implement certain notice and takedown procedures (see DMCA Safe Harbor).


Topic maintained by Stanford Center for Internet & Society

Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse page printed from: https://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1068
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts