{"id":122074,"date":"2026-04-09T21:25:54","date_gmt":"2026-04-09T21:25:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2026\/04\/09\/a-baseless-copyright-claim-against-a-web-host-and-why-it-failed\/"},"modified":"2026-04-09T21:27:11","modified_gmt":"2026-04-09T21:27:11","slug":"a-baseless-copyright-claim-against-a-web-host-and-why-it-failed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2026\/04\/09\/a-baseless-copyright-claim-against-a-web-host-and-why-it-failed\/","title":{"rendered":"A Baseless Copyright Claim Against A Web Host \u2014 And Why It Failed"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

from the damn-copyright-trolls<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

Copyright regulation is meant to encourage creativity. Too usually, it\u2019s used to extract payouts from others.<\/p>\n

Higbee & Associates, a regulation agency\u00a0known for sending copyright demand letters<\/a>\u00a0to web site homeowners, focused Could First Motion Expertise, accusing it of infringing {a photograph} owned by Agence France-Presse (AFP). The declare was baseless. Could First didn\u2019t publish the picture. It didn\u2019t even personal the web site the place the picture appeared.<\/p>\n

Could First is a nonprofit membership group that gives webhosting and technical infrastructure to social justice teams world wide. The allegedly infringing picture was posted years in the past by one among Could First\u2019s members, a human rights group primarily based in Mexico. When Could First realized concerning the copyright criticism, it ensured that the group eliminated the picture.<\/p>\n

That ought to have been the tip of it. As an alternative, the agency demanded fee.<\/p>\n

So EFF stepped in as Could First\u2019s counsel and\u00a0explained why AFP and Higbee had no valid claim<\/a>. After receiving our response, Higbee backed down.<\/p>\n

This consequence is a reminder that targets of copyright calls for usually have robust defenses\u2014particularly when another person posted the fabric.<\/p>\n

Internet hosting Content material Isn\u2019t the Similar as Publishing It<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Copyright regulation treats those that create or management content material in a different way from those that merely present the instruments or infrastructure for others to speak.<\/p>\n

On this case, Could First supplied internet hosting providers however didn\u2019t publish the picture. Courts have lengthy acknowledged that service suppliers aren\u2019t direct infringers once they merely retailer materials on the path of customers. In these instances, service suppliers lack \u201cvolitional conduct\u201d\u2014the intentional act of copying or distributing the work.<\/p>\n

Copyright regulation additionally acknowledges that intermediaries can\u2019t realistically police every little thing customers add. That\u2019s why authorized protections just like the\u00a0Digital Millennium Copyright Act safe harbors<\/a>\u00a0exist. Even exterior these secure harbors, courts nonetheless defend service suppliers from legal responsibility once they promptly reply to notices.<\/p>\n

Could First did precisely what the regulation expects: it notified its member, and the picture got here down.<\/p>\n

A Declare That Ought to Have Been Withdrawn A lot Sooner<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The troubling a part of this story isn\u2019t simply {that a} demand was despatched. It\u2019s that Higbee and AFP continued to demand cash and threaten litigation after Could First defined that it was merely a internet hosting supplier and had the picture eliminated.<\/p>\n

In different phrases, the declare was constructed on shaky authorized floor from the beginning. As soon as Could First defined its function, Higbee ought to have withdrawn its demand. People and small nonprofits shouldn\u2019t want legal professionals simply to cease aggressive copyright shakedowns.<\/p>\n

Statutory Damages Gas Copyright Abuse<\/strong><\/h3>\n

This isn\u2019t an remoted case\u2014it\u2019s a predictable results of copyright regulation\u2019s statutory damages regime.<\/p>\n

Statutory damages can attain $150,000 per work, no matter precise hurt. That giant leverage incentivizes companies like Higbee to ship mass demand letters searching for fast settlements. Even meritless claims can generate income when recipients are too afraid, confused, or resource-constrained to battle again.<\/p>\n

This hits group organizations, unbiased publishers, and small service suppliers that don\u2019t have in-house authorized groups particularly laborious. Confronted with the specter of ruinous statutory damages, many simply pay what’s demanded.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not how copyright regulation ought to work.<\/p>\n

Know Your Rights<\/strong><\/h3>\n

When you obtain a copyright demand primarily based on materials another person posted, don\u2019t assume you\u2019re liable.<\/p>\n

You’ll have defenses primarily based on:<\/p>\n