DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Google

sender

on behalf of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.

[Private] , , , US Sent on June 27, 2014

recipient

Google, Inc.

[Private] Mountain View, CA, 94043, US Received on June 27, 2014

Re: Websearch Infringement Notification via Online Form Complaint

Sent via: online form

Notice Type:: Dmca

Action taken:: Yes

Copyright claim #1

Kind of Work: image

Description The following links infringe on WWE's copyrighted Pay Per View event Money In The Bank 2014, set to air this Sunday, June 29, by one or more of the following means: - providing a link to a free (pirated) stream of this event - providing a promise of DIRECT free streaming of this event on the identified site - using copyrighted images, logos and celebrity photos to promote the site
Original URLs:
1. http://www.wwe.com/shows/moneyinthebank/2014/wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-predictions-26410927
Allegedly Infringing URLs:
1. http://sportsnationhd.com/
2. http://allsportstvliveanytime2014.blogspot.com/
3. http://beastfeeds.com/
4. http://crimaz.com/
5. http://cytu.be/r/NXTWreddit
6. http://freeforumzone.leonardo.it/discussione.aspx?idd=5319082
7. http://livemoneyinthebankppv-hdq24.blogspot.com/
8. http://miziko.com/
9. http://moneyinthebankstream.jimdo.com/
10. http://smackyourtv.com/
11. http://sports2watch.com/Online-Media/
12. http://sportsbun.com/wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-live-stream-online/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sportsbun+(SportsBun+%E2%80%93+Sports+News+%26+Live+Streaming+Entertainment)
13. http://sportstvstreams.com/wwe/
14. http://steamcommunity.com/id/moneyinthebank2014live
15. http://tgo-tv.com/watch/event/wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-live-stream.html
16. http://thebronynetwork.ucoz.net/
17. http://tuberamble.com/?p=21081
18. http://tubesports.net/
19. http://watchwwelive.net/
20. http://wcstreams.cf/
21. http://wfzone2b.altervista.org/mitb14of/
22. http://wrestling-network.net/
23. http://wrestlingup.com/category/wwe-shows/
24. http://wwemoneyinthebankladermatchlive.blogspot.com/
25. http://www.ilive.to/view/65059/WWE_Money_in_the_Bank_2014_Live_Stream-live-stream-channel
26. http://www.ilive.to/view/65059/WWE_Network-live-stream-channel
27. http://www.justin.tv/
28. http://www.livestream.com/httpwwwwrestlingnetworknet
29. http://www.livestream.com/thebronynetwork6
30. http://www.miziko.com/forum/live-streams/elite-streams/66-wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-live-stream-hq
31. http://www.miziko.com/forum/live-streams/elite-streams/67-wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-live-stream-hd
32. http://www.ppvlivestream.com/ch-1
33. http://www.time4tv.com/2013/12/wwe-network.php
34. http://www.vipboxus.co/sports/wwe.html
35. http://www.watchfriday.com/watch-wwe-money-in-the-bank-2014-live-stream-free-online-full-show-june-29th-2014/
36. http://www.whsports.tv/

Related FAQs

Does the DMCA require service providers to filter or monitor user postings to their sites?

No. The DMCA safe harbor protections apply to a service provider who responds expeditiously to notices of claimed infringement. Nothing in the statute imposes affirmative obligations to watch for or block potential future infringements.

What are the communication requirements that Section 512 imposes on OSPs, complainants, and alleged infringers?

Each of the parties -- the complainant, the Online Service Provider (OSP), and the alleged infringer -- has the right to communicate with the other parties. In addition, OSPs and complainants are required to engage in certain communications in order to take advantage of the DMCA's notice-and-takedown and safe harbor provisions.

The complainant starts the Sec. 512 process by notifying the Online Service Provider (OSP) or the OSP's agent in writing of a copyright infringement. Section 512(c)(3)(A)(iii) sets out the requirements for notice to OSPs. Under this section, the complainant must specifically identify the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.

Section 512(d)(3) sets out the procedure for contacting information location tools, such as search engines. Under Sec. 512(d), the complainant must identify the reference or link to the allegedly infringing material, and must provide enough information for the search engine to locate the link.

The complainant is not required to contact the alleged infringer at any time. [§ 512(h)(5).] However, complainants who do wish to contact the infringer, or to file suit on an infringer, may use the Sec. 512(h) subpoena process to require an OSP provide its customers' identifying information to the complainant.

The OSP has two separate sets of communication obligations. First, the OSP is generally required to establish policies regarding copyright infringement and repeat infringers and to inform subscribers and account holders about those policies as well as about the actions taken against repeat infringers. [§ 512(i)(1)(A).] This applies both to Sec. 512(c) ISPs and Sec. 512(d) information location tools.

Second, once an OSP receives a Section 512 takedown notice, it is required to notify its subscriber that it has disabled access to the allegedly infringing material. [§ 512(g)(2)(A).]

A recipient is not required to respond in any way to Sec. 512 notices from OSPs or complainants. However, without a recipient response, the OSP will generally remove or disable access to the material, possibly even disabling an ISP account. To avoid this, the recipient may file a counter-notification with the OSP, denying that the material infringes copyright. [§ 512(g)] If an OSP receives a counter-notification, then the service provider must notify the complainant that it will cease disabling access in 10 business days unless the complainant obtains a court-imposed restraining order. [§ 512(g)(2)(C)]

Does an ISP have to respond to the complainant to tell them when the material has been removed?

[not yet answered]

Does filing a counter-notification indicate that you are willing to defend yourself against a claim of copyright infringement?

Filing a counter-notification indicates that the subscriber has a "good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled." [15 U.S.C. s 512(g)(c)(3)] A counter-notification also requires a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction in which the address of the subscriber is located. [17 U.S.C. s 512(g)(3)(D)]

Thus, the filing of a counter-notification does not explicitly indicate consent to defend against a claim of copyright infringement; it merely indicates a good faith belief that the challenged material is non-infringing. An individual who believes that a user has infringed or is infringing upon his or her copyright may sue the user for infringement regardless of whether a take-down notice is sent to the service provider. The safe-harbor rules do not affect the right of a lawful copyright holder to sue a user who directly infringes his or her copyright.

How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?

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.

What is copyright infringement? Are there any defenses?

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:

the purpose and character of the use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of copying, and
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.

Where can I find the text of the U.S. Copyright Act?

The federal Copyright Act may be found at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/.

What is third-party liability, also known as "secondary liability"?

The concept of third party liability refers, as the name implies, to situations in which responsibility for harm can be placed on a party in addition to the one that actually caused the injury. The most common example comes from tort law: a customer in a grocery store drops a bottle of wine and another customer slips on the puddle and injures himself; he may bring an action for negligence against the customer who dropped the bottle and against the owner of the grocery store. Under the common law doctrine of third-party liability, a plaintiff must show not only that an injury actually occurred, but also (in most cases) that some sort of connection existed between the third party and the person who actually caused the injury.

As such the concept of third-party liability is often divided into two different types: contributory infringement and vicarious liability. Typically, contributory infringement exists when the third party either assists in the commission of the act which causes the injury, or simply induces the primary party to do so commit the act which caused the injury. Vicarious liability often requires the third party to have exerted some form of control over the primary party

What is a valid copyright license?

A valid license is an agreement where the copyright owner retains his or her ownership of the rights involved, but allows a third party to exercise some or all of those rights without fear of a copyright infringement suit. A license is preferred over an assignment of rights where the copyright holder wishes to maintain some ownership over the rights, or wishes to exercise continuing control over how the third party uses the copyright holder's rights.

What defenses are there to copyright infringement?

The primary defense to copyright infringement is "fair use." 17 U.S.C.

Do DMCA 512 provisions apply to other rights such as defamation and trademark? [link to 569 for more info about trademark] [link to 436 for definition of word defamation] [link to 51 for trademark]

[not yet answered]

What happens if an individual is found to repeatedly infringe?

The safe harbor provisions require the service provider to include in its copyright infringement policies a termination policy that results in individuals who repeatedly infringe copyrighted material being removed from the service provider networks. [512(i)(1)(A)] This termination policy must be made public in the terms of use that the service provider includes in its contracts or on its web site.

Does a service provider have to notify its users about its policies regarding the removal of materials?

To qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions, the service provider must give notice to its users of its policies regarding copyright infringement and the consequences of repeated infringing activity. [512(i)(1)(A)] The notice can be a part of the contract signed by the user when signing up for the service or a page on the service provider's web site explaining the terms of use of their systems. While there are no specific rules about how this notice must be made, it must be "reasonably implemented" so that subscribers and account holders are informed of the terms. [512(i)(1)(A)]

Why does a web host, blogging service provider, or search engine get DMCA takedown notices?

Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(c)'s safe-harbor for hosts of "Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users" or Section 512(d)'s safe-harbor for providers of "Information Location Tools." These 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 it hosts or links to, it can avoid the possibility of money damages by following the DMCA's takedown procedure when it gets a notice. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous.

What is the difference between 512(c) and (d)?

[not yet answered]

Advanced Search: add additional search queries

DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Google

sender

MarkMonitor Brand Protection

on behalf of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.

recipient

Google, Inc.

Re: Websearch Infringement Notification via Online Form Complaint

Copyright claim #1