Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Copyright Office Updates Takedown Notice Agent Registration
The Copyright Office has mandated a new procedure for how online service providers — including websites, hosting companies, mobile app publishers and other online services that permit user-generated content — must designate an agent to receive notifications of claimed infringement under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The new procedure is electronic and will be both faster and less expensive than the prior process. However, service providers that have already appointed agents with the Copyright Office must submit a new designation through the electronic system by Dec. 31, 2017, to maintain the “safe harbor” from copyright infringement.
In enacting the DMCA in 1998 to address copyright infringement on the Internet, Congress set out a notice and takedown procedure for copyright owners to report claimed infringement to the designated agent of an online services provider. Service providers are broadly defined as “a provider of online services or network access” for material stored in the service provider's network or system by a user. That's the “notice” part.
For the “takedown,” the service provider agrees to “expeditiously” remove the material identified by the copyright owner from the service provider's network or system. In exchange, along with meeting several other statutory requirements, the service provider will not be liable for copyright infringement that may be perpetrated by its users through the service provider's networks or systems. This safe harbor from copyright infringement protects service providers from liability for infringing activities arising from user-generated content.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?