Record labels defeat ISP’s ‘false piracy notices’ countersuit
Major record labels have prevailed against an internet service provider (ISP), after the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed a complaint on December 29, which alleged the music companies targeted subscribers with false and deceptive piracy notices.
ISP Bright House Networks, a subsidiary of Charter Communications, filed a countersuit in July after major record labels including Artista Records, Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music and Warner Records, accused the company of failing to suspend the accounts of repeat infringers.
According to US copyright law, ISPs must terminate the accounts of repeat infringers “in appropriate circumstances”.
Last year a federal jury in Virginia awarded a record $1 billion in a lawsuit against Cox Communications, after a jury found that the ISP wilfully allowed its customers to illegally download more than 10,000 musical works owned by Sony and Warner.
The record companies had claimed that they had sent thousands of statutory infringement notices to Cox, advising the ISP of its subscribers’ “blatant and systematic use” of Cox’s service to illegally download, copy, and distribute copyright-protected music.
In a bid to avoid the same outcome, Bright House accused record labels of sending inaccurate and deceptive takedown notices, violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) as well as the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA).
A month later, the ISP asked for permission to add the Recording Industry Association of America and its anti-piracy partner MarkMonitor to the suit.
While the record labels conceded that some incorrect notices were sent, they claimed that Bright House’s claims were invalid because the company failed to take any action based on their notices.
During the legal proceedings, the music companies underscored the “repeat infringer” issue, arguing that because the ISP didn’t tackle persistent infringers, no harm had been caused by the issuance of false notices.
US District Court Judge Mary Scriven found in favour of the record labels.
“This counterclaim fails as a matter of law because Bright House does not allege that it removed or disabled access to any allegedly infringing content in response to the notices,” she said.
The ISP’s claim that the labels violated the FDUTPA also failed as Judge Scriven found that a proper FDUTPA claim required substantial evidence that the false notices were sent as part of “trade or commerce”.
“The FDUTPA claim is defective because the infringement notices do not constitute ‘advertising, soliciting, providing, offering, or distributing’ any ‘thing of value’ to Bright House, its subscribers, or any other party,” said Scriven.
“Plaintiffs sent the infringement notices as part of an alleged effort to enforce their legal rights in recordings and compositions they claimed to own,” she added.
Consequently, the court dismissed both of the ISP’s counterclaims, along with its attempts to levy the same allegations against the RIAA.
The case will proceed to trial without any counterclaims.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox
Today’s top stories
Hermès bags Birkin TM win in Japan
China establishes new specialist IP court
IP services: success lies in empowerment, efficiency, and value creation
