The Pennsylvania mother who sued Universal Music over a YouTube video of her toddler dancing to a Prince song isn't having much luck in court.
Last October, we wrote about the suit that Stephanie Lenz filed in federal court in San Jose claiming the record label had abused the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by sending YouTube a notice of copyright infringement. Three lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation are representing Lenz.
Lenz's 30-second video shows her son Holden, then 13 months old, dancing in the family's kitchen with the Prince song "Let's Go Crazy" partially audible in the background (Universal represents some of Prince's publishing rights). It led to a DMCA takedown notice from Universal.
On April 8, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel threw out Lenz's lawsuit against Universal, saying the argument that Universal was misusing its copyright was weak--and that the case wasn't really akin to the Diebold wrongful-use-of-the-DMCA lawsuit. Here's what Fogel wrote:
Diebold is distinguishable based on its facts; although it included a takedown of hundreds of emails, the defendant failed to identify any specific emails containing copyrighted content, and it appeared to acknowledge that at least some of the emails were subject to the fair use doctrine. Here, it is undisputed that the song "Let's Go Crazy" is copyrighted, and Universal does not concede that the posting is a fair use... There must be a showing of a knowing misrepresentation on the part of the copyright owner. Lenz fails to allege facts from which such a misrepresentation may be inferred. Lenz also fails to allege why her use of "Let's Go Crazy" was a "self-evident" fair use. Accordingly, Lenz's first claim will be dismissed, with leave to amend.
Fogel also rejected the other two arguments. EFF had asked for a ruling that the 30-second snippet did not violate copyright law; Fogel concluded it was unnecessary because "Universal has indicated it had and presently has no intention of ever asserting an infringement action directly against Lenz based on the 'Let's Go Crazy' video."
The video, by the way, is back up on YouTube.
But Fogel did say that EFF could try to make its misuse-of-copyright argument a second time. EFF did just that by filing a second complaint (PDF) on April 18. It says, in part:
Defendants had actual subjective knowledge of the contents of the Holden Dance Video and that it did not infringe any Universal copyrights on the date they sent YouTube the takedown notice regarding the Holden Dance Video... Defendants should have known, if they had acted with reasonable care or diligence, or would have no substantial doubt had they been acting in good faith, that the Holden Dance Video did not infringe any Universal copyrights on the date they sent YouTube their complaint under the DMCA.
The case is noteworthy because so few lawsuits over DMCA misuse have been filed. Diebold, which sent dozens of cease-and-desist letters after internal leaked documents appeared online, appeared before Judge Fogel--and ended up writing a check to EFF for $125,000.
Prince can't push this mother around.
The pop star wanted YouTube to remove a clip of an infant boy dancing to his 1984 hit song "Let's Go Crazy." When the clip got scrubbed, the baby's mother cried foul and filed suit asking for damages. The woman's lawyers at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) say the dancing-baby clip is the poster child for fair use.
Corynne McSherry, the EFF attorney representing the baby's mother, Stephanie Lenz, said the music on the clip is barely audible and that Lenz, from rural Pennsylvannia, posted the video for noncommercial uses. Copyright owners are often too quick on the trigger when it comes to sending takedown notices to YouTube and other Web sites, according to McSherry.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act enables owners of intellectual property to demand that unauthorized copies of their work be removed from Web sites. But Congress also built in safeguards to prevent copyright owners from making misrepresentations.
"We've seen a lot of abuse of the takedown procedures," McSherry said. "It's very easy to get material taken down, and unfortunately folks aren't careful enough when issuing notices. This interferes with free-speech rights. The Internet can't continue to grow or be a robust forum if users can't share views or larger political commentary without being worried that every little piece of content is going to be removed."
There is also something unique about this case. Universal Music Group is the defendant because it represents some of Prince's publishing rights (his current music label is Sony BMG). A year ago, Universal signed a licensing deal with YouTube that allows users to include the label's music in videos. Under the terms of the agreement, YouTube agreed to remove material from any Universal artist who declines to participate.
According to sources knowledgeable with the agreement, only one artist represented by Universal has elected to opt out of the YouTube deal: Prince.
A representative of Universal declined to comment.
The iconic musician sometimes calls up Universal when he spots unauthorized uses of his work and asks them to send takedown notices, the sources said. The author of such hits as "Purple Rain" and "Little Red Corvette," Prince has hired a company called Web Sheriff to patrol the Web looking for unauthorized copies of his work and then try to get them taken down. The company said it plans to spearhead a legal challenge to YouTube and other Web sites on behalf of Prince and the 1970s disco band, the Village People.
John Giacobbi, Web Sheriff's president, said by phone Tuesday that his company had nothing to do with the Lenz baby clip and declined to comment further.
The lawsuit appears to have a ways to go before the issue is decided. Universal has filed a motion of dismiss and EFF is scheduled to issue their reply in the next few weeks.
- prev
- 1
- next
