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 > WWE Complains to Digg Printer-friendly version

WWE Complains to Digg

April 23, 2009

 

Sender Information:
World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.
Sent by: [Private]
Intellectual Property Counsel



Recipient Information:

Digg, Inc.


CA, USA


Sent via: email
Re: Digital Milennium Copyright Notice (UGC)

Dear Sir or Madam:


World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (“WWE”) is the
exclusive owner of numerous trademarks, service marks, trade dress
and copyrights, including, but not limited to, WWE, the WWE logo,
RAW, SmackDown, ECW, WCW, as well as all of its talent images,
likenesses, and rights of publicity. WWE, as the premier provider
of wrestling entertainment services, has through extensive use and
promotion of its intellectual property, established substantial and
valuable good will in its intellectual property. As such, WWE
vigilantly protects its intellectual property rights and does not
tolerate any infringement of the same.


WWE has discovered that its copyrighted images,
programming and/or hyperlinks to this content have been uploaded to
various users accounts on your site, without the authorization of
WWE. A sampling of this infringing content is located at a
representative sample of the following URLs:


http://digg.com/extreme_sports/Watch_WWE_Backlash_2009_Live_Streaming


WWE demands the immediate removal of these videos,
broadcasts, and these user accounts. I have good faith belief that
the use of the copyrighted materials described above and contained
on the service is not authorized by the copyright owner, WWE, its
agent, or by protection of law.


I swear under penalty of perjury, that the information
in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or
am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right
that is allegedly infringed. The demands made herein are not made
to the exclusion of other remedies to which WWE is entitled and WWE
specifically reserves the right to seek all remedies available to it
under law as a result of these infringing activities.


Regards,


[private], Esq.
Associate Counsel, Intellectual Property
World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.
[private]
Stamford, CT 06902
Tel: [private]
Fax: [private]
E-mail: [private]@wwecorp.com

 
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