What is the DMCA?

The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) is a United States copyright law focused on
digital mediums that helps content owners get their stolen content removed in a fast and
efficient manner. This extends to places such as Internet Service Providers (ISP), web hosting
providers, and search engines.

A DMCA takedown notice applies to where the content is physically hosted. So people
outside the US can still file DMCA complaints. For content hosted outside of the US, many
hosting providers will still honor DMCA complaints, however, legally they are not obliged to
comply.

One thing website owners tend to forget is that a DMCA takedown doesn’t require the
content to be copyrighted in order to process the takedown or for the request to have the
content taken down acted upon by the website owner or ISP.

Here are some examples of digital content that this applies to:

 Text (TXT, RTF, DOC, DOCx, PDF, PPT, etc.)

 Images (BMP, EPS, SVG, JPG, JPEG, GIF, WEBP, PNG, PSD, RAW, TIFF, etc. This
includes on social media)
 Video (MPG, AVI, RM, MOV, Quicktime, Windows Media Player, RealPlayer)
 Music (AIF, AU, MP3, MP4, MID, WAV, etc. )

Over the last decade, it has become very important for bloggers, webmasters, and hosts to
understand how the DMCA procedure works so that everyone can keep their content
protected; as well as know how to deal with complaints or notices when they arrive.
According to Google’s transparency report, requests to remove content due to copyright
have been increasing rapidly.

As of March 2019, URLs requested to be removed due to copyright issues has surpassed 4
billion!

What Does DMCA Protected Mean?

You might see the term or phrase “DMCA protected” in the footer of some websites or even
on a badge. However, this is slightly redundant, simply due to the fact that any published
work in the United States is already protected by the DMCA.

However, if you see badge like this one below, it might mean the website is using a service
like DMCA.com which provides copyright protection services. In other words, the website
owner is paying DMCA.com to handle the takedown notices for them.
 DMCA protected (Image: DMCA)

The DMCA Protection Badge is a Placed on a Site for Three Reasons

1. As a link to the website's content ownership statement certificate.

2. To add a Website Certificate to each of your website pages. There are three
versions of the website certificate:
1. Verified
2. Nonverified
3. Unauthorized

3. To demonstrate to site users the website owner has chosen the DMCA.com
Protection Service.

How do DMCA.com Badges & Certificates Work?

The DMCA.com Badge has specific functions. Protection Badges should only be linked to the
Website Protection Certificate. Should the Protection Badge be used for alternate purposes
such as; not linked to a protection status page, or if it is found on a website using stolen
content, it must be reported.

How to Add a DMCA.com Protection Badge to your Website

Register
Pick a Badge
Be sure you are logged into your account when you select your badge. If you do not pick the
badge code when you are logged into the Protection Portal none of the pages your badge
choice is placed on will be indexed to your DMCA.com Protection account….

Copy & Paste

Copy the embed code. Paste it either in the footer of your website (to protect all pages with
that footer), or on certain pages you want protected.
Badge Code Best Practices
1. Make certain the DMCA.com code is "view-able" within the source code of your
webpage.
2. Do not remove the GUID or Unique alphanumeric tracking and status page
code.
3. Do not remove the status page link, it's better for users to see your protection
status than the DMCA.com home page.
4. Make certain the webpage(s) you are placing the badge on is free of validation
errors. Check your webpages through a markup validation service.
 5. Get Verified Status is the best option for your website to have a fully verified
website certificate and status page. The website certificate and status page is
connected to your Protection Badge.

Check Protected Pages List

Every page that contains a DMCA Protection Badge will be automatically added to the
protected pages list. New web pages with the DMCA Protection Badge are detected
instantly and generally appear in the secure DMCA Protection Portal Protected Pages list
within 24 hours after placing the DMCA Protection Badge on your webpage.
Protection Page Indexing
Placing the DMCA.com Protection Badge on your webpage triggers the DMCA.com
crawling/indexing systems to come check your page as it is requested. For faster indexing
click on "Fast Index" on the DMCA.com dashboard. Be sure to keep in mind:
1. Most new web browsers cache the badge and so it may not be actually
requesting the badge from each page that you visit as your browser is likely
caching our protection badge, therefore not queuing the page for
crawling/indexing.
2. With DMCA.com's Free Protection Badge service indexing is also page traffic
dependent. Some pages may index slower if they do not have user traffic. To
test simply refresh a low/no traffic page and check the index.

How can the DMCA.com Badge protect a website?

The DMCA.com Protection Badge is a symbol or logo displayed on a website to indicate that
the site is protect by DMCA.com. Here's how the DMCA.com protection badge can help
protect a website.
Declaration of Ownership
Adding the DMCA Protection Badge to your website provides a clear declaration to all users
on the site regarding the ownership of the content being displayed on EVERY webpage. In
almost all jurisdictions with copyright law this statement of ownership, or publication rights
is critical. The badge with the certificate provides this statement to all users.
Deterrence
Displaying the DMCA badge on your website sends a signal to potential infringers that you
are actively monitoring and protecting your content. It serves as a deterrent against
unauthorized use of your copyrighted materials by making it clear that you are prepared to
take legal action if necessary.
DMCA Notices and Takedown Services
DMCA.com provides Professionally Managed Takedown Services and DMCA Notice
Templates for copyright owners to request the removal of infringing content from online
platforms. By prominently displaying the DMCA.com badge, you signal that you are aware of
your rights under the law and are ready to enforce them. This may encourage potential
infringers to think twice before using your content without permission.

DMCA Safe Harbor

Under the DMCA law, online service providers can benefit from a safe harbor provision,
which shields them from liability for copyright infringement committed by their users. By
displaying the DMCA.com Badge, you demonstrate that you are committed to complying
with the DMCA's requirements, which may help you qualify for this legal protection in case
your users infringe on others' copyrights.
Monitoring
The DMCA.com badge will notify you if someone copies your website code. Often, website
thiefs will copy paste and entire website's source code and this includes the DMCA.com
Badge code. You will receive an email notification when this happens, to alert you to the
theft of your website.
It's important to note that while the DMCA.com protection badge can be a useful tool, it
does not provide absolute protection against copyright infringement. It is still crucial to
actively monitor your content, promptly respond to infringements, and, if necessary, seek
legal counsel to enforce your rights effectively.

How Do I Handle a DMCA Takedown Notice Against Me?

The first thing you should know is how to deal with a DMCA takedown notice when it is filed
against you. Generally, when your ISP or web hosting provider receives a DMCA complaint
they will demand the removal of the content immediately, or do it for you. And by this, it
sometimes means they even shut off your hosting. So don’t ignore emails about DMCA
takedown notices.

Your provider might not necessarily even check into whether or not your content is actually
infringing. Depending on their location, they might be legally obligated to take this content
down and will do so in a fast and efficient manner.

If you believe that you received a complaint in error, or that you do in fact own the content,
then you can submit a DMCA counter-notice. Under section 512(f) of the DMCA, any person
who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity was removed or disabled
by mistake or misidentification may be subject to liability. So be very careful when you file a
DMCA counter-notice, if you are not sure whether or not you own the content then you
should probably seek legal advice.

Your counter-notice needs to contain the following information:

 Physical or electronic signature

 Name, address, and phone number
 Identification of the material and its location before it was removed (URL)
 A statement that the material was removed by mistake or misidentification
(remember you are liable)
 Consent to the jurisdiction of a federal court in the district where you live or where
your service provider is located
 Consent to accept service of process from the party who submitted the takedown
notice.
How Do I Issue a DMCA Takedown Notice?
The other side of the DMCA process is when you find that someone else has stolen your
content. Here are the steps you can follow to ensure it gets taken down.

Try Reaching Out to the Website Owner First

Before drafting up an official DMCA complaint, it can sometimes be quicker to email the
owner of the website directly. You can check to see if they list their email anywhere online
or if they have a contact form on their website. After getting an email like this, some will just
remove the content right away.

Here is a template we use. Feel free to copy and modify it:

Hello,
I work for [COMPANY] and we discovered your website (https://domain.com) has been
using content that is owned by us.
Here are some examples of our content:
 https://yourdomain.com/~ [EXACT CONTENT/IMAGE LOCATION]
 https://yourdomain.com/~
—
And here are copies on your site:
 https://domain.com/~ [EXACT CONTENT/IMAGE LOCATION]
 https://domain.com/~
Please remove all copyrighted content belonging to [COMPANY] immediately otherwise
we’ll have to proceed with filing a DMCA complaint.
I have created a case ID #xxxx to track this issue until it is resolved.
If you have any questions regarding this, let me know.
Thanks

Due to the fact that people are busy and sometimes miss emails, you might want to try
sending an email more than once. Here you can find a few solid tips on how to find anyone’s
email address.

If they don’t respond then you can proceed with the steps below.

Sometimes you have to bring down the hammer to protect your content and
images. 🔨CLICK TO TWEET

1. Find The Person

The very first thing you have to do is find the person’s web host so that you know where to
file the DMCA complaint. An easy way to do this is to look up the IP address of the website.
You can either ping it or use a free online tool like Domain Tools. In this example below, we
are using a site that is hosted on Kinsta on Google Cloud Platform. You can see Domain Tools
easily shows us the IP address of the domain we looked up.
Find IP address for DMCA takedown notice

You can then take the IP address and look it up using the ARIN Whois Service. They have a
good database of records and comments about which IPs are owned by which companies.
You can see in this example once we looked up the IP address, it immediately shows us that
it is on a netblock used by Google Cloud customers and the email address and web page for
abuse complaints.

Google Cloud platform abuse example

DMCA also has a great free Whois lookup that generates network information. You are
limited to 5 free lookups per month. Another alternative you can try if the above doesn’t
render any good results is the free Who is Hosting This tool from HostAdvice.
Who is hosting this?

Note: If they are running behind a CDN or proxy such as Cloudflare, this makes it a lot harder
as they will show as the owner of the IP address. In that scenario, you might have more luck
reaching out to the individual site owner first (if you haven’t already). However, Cloudflare
does have a DMCA complaint form.
Unleash your Site's Speed with Kinsta CDN 🚀
Kinsta CDN is free, included in all plans, and offers a one-click setup with 260+ PoPs. And
with our free Edge Caching this makes Kinsta the fastest solution in the WordPress industry.

Speed up your site

2. Where to Submit the DMCA Takedown Complaint

Now that you know where the person’s content is hosted you must submit the complaint.
Most providers have easy ways to access them. Look on their contact pages, or in the footer
for anything that says “complaints” or “abuse.” Here are a couple of links to some common
providers.

 Google Cloud Platform Abuse

 DigitalOcean Abuse
 Linode Abuse
 Vultr Abuse

If you can’t find an online form then you must contact a DMCA agent directly. This is usually
a long drawn out process. Contacting the web host or ISP provider directly is usually the
fastest way. You can also pay a professional team to handle the DMCA takedown for you.

3. What to Include in the DMCA Takedown Complaint

You must include the following information to ensure your takedown complaint is handled
properly.

 Physical or electronic signature

 The location and identification of the material you are claiming is infringing (this
could be URLs, etc)
 Your contact information, address, phone number, mailing address, etc
  Statement of good faith that the use of the material is not authorized by the
copyright owner or you
 A statement that everything is accurate (again, remember you are liable under
penalty of perjury)

DMCA Takedown Template

Here is a DMCA takedown template that we use. Feel free to copy and modify it:

Subject Line: Takedown Notice Pursuant to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998

My name is [NAME] and I’m the [POSITION] at [COMPANY].

This is a notice in accordance with Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(”DMCA”) requesting that you immediately cease to provide access to the following
copyrighted material. A website that your company hosts (according to WHOIS information)
is infringing on copyrighted material owned by our company.

The original [CONTENT/IMAGES], of which we own the exclusive copyrights, can be found at
these URLs:

 — [EXACT CONTENT/IMAGE LOCATION]

 —
 —

The unauthorized and infringing [CONTENT/IMAGES] can be found at this IP address/URLs:

IP address:

 — [EXACT CONTENT/IMAGE LOCATION]

 —
 —

My contact information is:

Name
Company Address
Phone

I have good faith belief that the use of the described material in the manner complained of
is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or by operation of law. The information
in this notice is accurate, up to date, and I can confirm that [COMPANY] is the copyright
owner.

Should you wish to discuss this further, please contact me directly.

Signed:
Name
Date:
4. Getting the Content Removed from Search Engines

If the original content is taken down, then it will automatically get removed from the search
engines. However, if for some reason the above process fails, you can also submit a
complaint directly with Google and Bing.

While this won’t always get it removed from the person’s site, it will at least remove it from
SERPs so that nobody can find it. It will also ensure that it never ranks over your own
content.

Remove Content From Google Search

To remove content from Google Search, use this tool. Select the “Web Search” option and
fill out the remaining questions according to your individual case.

Remove content from Google search

Remove Content From Bing Search

To remove content from Bing Search, use this tool, and fill out their copyright infringement
report.
Remove content from Bing search

How Long Does a DMCA Notice Take?

Generally, a DMCA takedown notice will take around 72 hours. However, we’ve seen them
go really quick (within 24 hours) and also drag on for 6+ months. This depends on a couple
of things:

 How fast the company is at processing the DMCA requests.

 The location of the content. Remember, DMCA is only applicable to copyrighted
material in the United States. Therefore, if you’re emailing a company outside of the
United States, you might never hear back. Although most hosting providers,
regardless of location, will try to help.

Summary
Hopefully, now you now know a little more about DMCA and how takedown notices work,
both when filed against you and when you need to protect your own content.

Have any experience with people copying your content or images? We’d love to hear about
it below in the comments.
Save time and costs, plus maximize site performance, with $275+ worth of enterprise-level
integrations included in every Managed WordPress plan. This includes a high-performance
CDN, DDoS protection, malware and hack mitigation, edge caching, and Google’s fastest
CPU machines. Get started with no long-term contracts, assisted migrations, and a 30-day
money-back guarantee.

DMCA RECENT AMENDMENTS:

KEY TAKEAWAYS AND OUTLOOK FOR 2022

Like so many things in 2021, a few long-awaited copyright developments have
spilled into 2022, with anticipated amendments to key provisions in the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act topping the list of legislation to watch.

The key issues we are tracking include the following:

WHETHER SWEEPING CHANGES TO COPYRIGHT LAW PROPOSED BY MEMBERS OF US

CONGRESS WILL TAKE EFFECT
US Senator Thom Tillis’s (R-NC) proposed Digital Copyright Act of 2021 (DCA), which
amends key provisions for addressing online copyright infringement in the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA), was pushed to 2022. Chief among the
proposed changes are a notice-and-staydown system (as opposed to the current
notice-and-takedown system) requiring online service providers (OSPs) to go beyond
taking down copyrighted works and implement a mechanism to ensure the work is
not reposted. In 2022, we expect to see continued discussion and debate around the
DCA, including the implications of placing the US Copyright Office under the US
Department of Commerce.

THE IMPACT OF GOOGLE V. ORACLE ON SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND THE

ONGOING “FAIR USE” DEBATE
The decade-long dispute between Google LLC and Oracle America, Inc. over
“declaring code” ended with a win for software developers and promoters of open-
source works. The Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Google was the
biggest copyright decision in years and will undoubtedly lead to many future claims
regarding the application of the fair use defense to software-related copyright
claims.

In another high-profile copyright infringement case involving the fair use

defense, Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, the US Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit affirmed that Google will likely have a negligible effect on artistic
works. The Court analyzed its prior opinion considering Google and reaffirmed its
decision in favor of the originating artist. Both courts noted the difference between
the mediums (portraits versus software code), finding that copyright protection is
stronger when the material serves an “artistic rather than utilitarian”
function―underscoring that Google will likely have negligible effect on artistic works.
WHAT THE HIGHEST COURT WILL SAY ABOUT A FASHION INDUSTRY INFRINGEMENT
DISPUTE
Unicolors, Inc., and H&M Hennes & Maurtiz, L.P., will soon receive the Supreme
Court’s opinion as to whether the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit erred in
breaking with its own prior precedent, the precedent of sister circuits and the
Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. § 411 requires referral to the Copyright
Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in
the subject copyright registration.

RELIEF FOR INDIVIDUAL ARTISTS THIS SUMMER IN THE FORM OF ALTERNATIVE

DISPUTE FORUMS
The Copyright Office announced that the much-anticipated commencement of the
Copyright Claims Board, which establishes an alternative forum for resolving
copyright disputes of low economic value, is now slated to launch operations in
summer 2022. This should bring much-needed relief to individual artists and small
groups of creatives.

DEVELOPMENTS SHAPING COPYRIGHT LAW

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT
Senator Tillis released a proposed update to the DMCA called the Digital Copyright
Act of 2021. Senator Tillis intends for the DCA to update and fill gaps in the DMCA,
which he asserts is out of date and ill-suited to the digital-media-driven world of
today.

The DCA proposes sweeping changes to the DMCA, among the most notable of which
would be moving from the current notice-and-takedown system to a notice-and-
staydown system. This would require OSPs to take down copyrighted works and then
implement a continuing search or online filter to ensure that the work is not
reposted.

The DCA would also require OSPs to search their systems to locate copies of
allegedly infringing works rather than requiring the complaining party to identify web
addresses for each infringing work. The DCA empowers the Copyright Office to
determine if OSPs are doing enough to combat copyright infringement and to revoke
“safe harbor” immunity if the OSPs are found to be lacking.

The DCA also proposes to reclassify the Copyright Office from a division of the
Library of Congress to an executive agency under the Department of Commerce.
This would make the register of copyrights a presidential appointee with a five-year
term.

The DCA has been met with praise by the Recording Academy, the Copyright
Alliance, the Association of American Publishers, the Recording Industry Association
of America and the Author’s Guild. These organizations have praised the proposed
legislation for increasing protections for copyright holders and increasing penalties
for infringement.

However, free-speech advocates and internet users have raised First Amendment
and censorship concerns, arguing that the DCA errs on the side of censorship,
restricts fair use and denies internet access rather than working to level the playing
field between copyright holders and users. The Electronic Frontier Foundation
published a letter expressing fears that the DCA would chill speech and expression
and make it harder for small OSPs to remain in compliance. Authors Alliance, Public
Knowledge and the Center for Democracy and Technology have expressed similar
concerns.

Moving forward into 2022, we expect to see further discussion and debate around
the DCA once it is introduced in Congress.

THE FAIR USE DOCTRINE IN LIGHT OF GOOGLE LLC V. ORACLE AMERICA,

INC.
In Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that Google’s use of
approximately 11,500 lines (out of 2.86 million lines) of Java application
programming interface (API) code was fair use, focusing in large part on the purpose
of Google’s use. The Court did not address the copyrightability of APIs; instead, the
Court assumed the API was copyrightable and addressed whether Google’s copying
was fair use.

The suit started in 2010, when Oracle sued Google in federal district court for
copying elements of its Java programming into Google’s Android operating system.
The court found that the Java code was not protected by copyright. Oracle appealed
and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the copyright
determination and remanded for a second trial on fair use. At the second trial, a jury
determined Google’s copying was fair use. The case went back to the Federal
Circuit, which held that Google’s copying was not fair use as a matter of law. The
Supreme Court agreed to consider the Federal Circuit’s determinations.

Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the majority, determined that Google’s
reimplemented user interface was a “new and transformative program” and,
therefore, a fair use of the Java API. Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices Brett
Kavanaugh, Elena Kagan, Neil M. Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor joined the majority
opinion. Justice Breyer applied the Copyright Act’s four-factor test for fair use:

COPYRIGHT ACT’S FOUR-FACTOR TEST FOR FAIR USE

1. THE PURPOSE AND CHARACTER Google’s limited copying of the code, in part
OF THE USE. to create new products and expand the use
and usefulness of smartphones, was a
transformative use.
2. THE NATURE OF THE The nature of the API favored fair use
COPYRIGHTED WORK. because the portion of the code (the declaring
code) that Google copied was more functional
in nature and different from the portion that
Google did not copy (the implementing
code).
3. THE AMOUNT AND Google only copied 0.4% of the entire Java
SUBSTANTIALITY OF API.
THE PORTION USED.
4. THE EFFECT OF THE USE ON THE Google’s Android operating system is not a
MARKET market substitute for Oracle’s Java
FOR AND VALUE OF THE WORK. programing.

On final balance, the Court determined that allowing the enforcement of Oracle’s
copyright would “risk harm to the public” and act as a “lock limiting the future
creativity of new programs.”
Justice Breyer emphasized that the mainly functional nature of computer programs
makes it difficult to apply traditional copyright principles, foreshadowing that the
Court’s decision may have negligible impacts on artistic works. Although that may be
the case, the Court’s ruling will likely have far-reaching impacts in the technology
market and, more specifically, software. The decision is broadly seen as a win for
software developers and promoters of open-source works.

TRANSFORMATIVENESS IN FAIR USE UNDER THE ANDY WARHOL

FOUNDATION FOR THE VISUAL ARTS, INC. V. GOLDSMITH
The Second Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the
Andy Warhol Foundation on its complaint for a declaratory judgment of fair use, as
well as the district court’s dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaim for copyright
infringement.

On July 1, 2019, a district court ruled that when the Andy Warhol Foundation copied
an unpublished photograph of the late singer Prince and created 16 variations of the
photo, these uses were fair use and not copyright infringement. Lynn Goldsmith, the
professional photographer who took the photograph of Prince, appealed.

The Second Circuit determined that the district court erred in its assessment and
application of the fair use factors and that the works did not qualify as fair use as a
matter of law. The Court emphasized that all four fair use factors continue to matter
and should be independently considered and weighed, even if a new use is found to
be transformative under the first factor. The Court considered the four factors and
found that each favored Goldsmith. Specifically, the Court determined that the
district court erred in its analysis of (1) factor one, because there was no
transformative use of the photograph as the portraits retained the essential
elements of the Goldsmith photograph; (2) factor two, because it relied on finding
transformativeness under factor one, even though the photograph was unpublished
and creative and (3) factor three, because the Foundation’s Prince series borrowed
significantly from the Goldsmith photograph, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
The Second Circuit agreed with the district court’s finding with respect to factor four,
but nonetheless determined that this factor disfavors fair use because it found harm
to Goldsmith’s potential licensing markets.

After the appellate court’s disposition, the Supreme Court issued its decision
in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. The Foundation filed a petition for rehearing,
which the Second Circuit granted to give careful consideration of the Supreme
Court’s opinion.

The Second Circuit analyzed its prior opinion in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling
in Google and determined that the principles enunciated in Google are fully
consistent with the appellate court’s original opinion. The Court noted that both
opinions recognize that determinations of fair use are highly contextual and fact-
specific and are not easily reduced to rigid rules. The Second Circuit further noted
that the Supreme Court repeatedly emphasized in Google that “[t]he fact that
computer programs are primarily functional makes it difficult to apply traditional
copyright concepts in that technological world.” The Second Circuit, like the Supreme
Court in Google, noted the difference between the mediums (portraits versus
software code), finding that copyright protection is stronger when the material
serves an “artistic rather than utilitarian” function.
UNICOLORS AND H&M HENNES & MAURITZ FACE OFF IN SCOTUS
INFRINGEMENT DISPUTE
On October 8, 2021, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from Unicolors, Inc.,
and H&M Hennes & Maurtiz, L.P., related to a dispute brought by Unicolors against
H&M for copyright infringement of a clothing design. The main issue is whether the
Ninth Circuit erred in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other
circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. § 411 requires referral to
the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the
work at issue in the subject copyright registration.

Unicolors creates and copyrights artwork that it markets to garment manufacturers.

In February 2011, Unicolors filed a copyright application for 31 graphic designs,
including its design called EH101. The Copyright Office approved the application and
issued a copyright registration. Subsequently, Unicolors publicly marketed some of
the 31 designs and confined others for specific customers.

In 2015, retail clothing company H&M began selling clothing with the same design as
EH101. Unicolors sued H&M and a jury found that H&M willfully infringed the EH101
copyright. Following the verdict, H&M filed a renewed judgment as a matter of law,
arguing that Unicolors did not hold a valid copyright on EH101 because Unicolors
included known inaccuracies in its copyright application in violation of 17 U.S.C. §
411. H&M argued that Unicolor improperly registered 31 individual designs under
one copyright registration. The district court denied the motion.

The Ninth Circuit determined that the copyright application was inaccurate because
the Copyright Act requires an applicant who registers multiple works under one
copyright application to also first publish those works as a single, bundled collection.
Unicolor failed to do so. Despite the inaccuracy, the Ninth Circuit noted, however,
that to invalidate the copyright H&M must show that the inaccuracy would have
caused the Copyright Office to reject Unicolors’ application. Unicolors filed
for certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted on June 1, 2021.

We will soon find out what the Supreme Court has to say about this question.

COPYRIGHT ALTERNATIVE IN SMALL-CLAIMS ENFORCEMENT ACT: A VENUE

AND A LESS-COMPLEX PROCESS IN SIGHT IN 2022
Annual iterations of copyright legislation are slated to culminate in June 2022 when
copyright owners can take their claims to a new venue and with less red tape.

In January 2021, Congress signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, into
law. The Consolidated Appropriations Act incorporates the Copyright Alternative in
Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2020. The CASE Act includes revisions to
the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C §§ 101 et seq., with the goal of creating a new venue for
copyright owners to enforce their rights instead having to file an action in federal
court. The new venue, the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), is designed to serve as an
alternative forum where parties may voluntarily seek to resolve certain copyright
claims regarding any category of copyrighted work.

In September 2021, the Copyright Office issued a set of proposed rules in

the Federal Register to establish the initial stages of a proceeding before the
CCB. The proposed rules prescribe how to file a complaint, which includes submitting
claim and notice forms online and paying a $100 filing fee. The proposed rulemaking
notes that the claim form will require less than what is required under Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure, Rule 12, as the Copyright Office notes that practice before the
CCB will be less complex than practice in federal courts.

At the close of 2021, the Copyright Office announced that it is extending the date by
which the CCB will commence operations by up to 180 days. Originally scheduled to
begin operations by December 27, 2021, the CCB will now begin operations by June
27, 2022.