Reversal of Verdict vs. Grande Would 'Upend' Well-Established Law: Copyright Alliance
Overturning the jury’s verdict in a copyright case in favor of Universal Music Group and other music labels would “upend decades of well-established law governing contributory copyright infringement,” said the Copyright Alliance’s amicus brief (docket 23-50162) Friday in the 5th…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Internet service provider Grande Communications is appealing a Jan. 30 ruling by U.S. District Judge David Ezra for Western Texas in Austin (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in favor of music labels that Grande is liable for copyright infringement for knowing its subscribers were engaging in copyright infringement and continuing to provide them the services necessary to infringe. Ezra awarded the labels $47 million in statutory damages (see 2303160029). Overturning the district court ruling would “would permit bad actors” like Grande “to facilitate massive digital theft, all to the grave detriment of the copyright holders, consumers of expressive works, and the creative economy,” said the brief. Reversal would “damage the very incentives for creation of expression for which the Framers took care to provide in the Constitution,” it said. Grande “attempts to cast itself as a mere innocent equipment provider,” but it “knowingly and materially contributed to copyright infringement on a massive scale,” said the alliance. “To evade liability, Grande argues that only those who induce copyright infringement or who distribute a product capable solely of infringing uses may be found liable for contributory infringement,” said the brief. That argument “ignores longstanding and unbroken case law,” which recognizes that secondary liability comprises three distinct doctrines: contributory infringement, vicarious liability, and inducement of copyright infringement, it said. Grande also doesn’t acknowledge "the clear legislative history and relevant statutory language of the Copyright Act of 1976," it said.