Perfect 10 Still Suing Anyone And Everyone They Can
from the not-what-copyright-law-was-for dept
You may recall the company Perfect 10 -- a purveyor of pornographic images -- which made a name for itself suing Google. It was an odd case with an odd decision. Basically, Perfect 10 was upset that some other websites (not Google) had taken their photos and placed them on free websites. Google then indexed those sites, and would display thumbnails for the images in its image search. According to Perfect 10, this is copyright infringement -- even though it wasn't Google that had done the copying, but other sites. Also, this was odd because courts have found that thumbnails linking to full images are fair use. Either way, what became clear was that Perfect 10 wasn't exactly concerned with how things got where the were -- it just wanted to sue anyone who touched its photos in any way. So, it probably shouldn't come as a surprise that the company is also suing various payment processors who process payments for other porn sites. Once again, the situation is that these other porn sites made unauthorized copies of the photos, but are then charging fees to access the content. The billing company have absolutely no way of knowing how these sites got their content, but Perfect 10 is arguing that since they profited from these sites anyway, they're liable. So far, the courts don't appear all that sympathetic to the reasoning -- but the appeals court has just sent it back to the lower court to examine whether one of the billing sites lost its DMCA safe harbor provisions by cutting off Perfect 10's credit card. The billing company says it did so for perfectly legitimate reasons: Perfect 10 kept buying subscriptions to various sites and then canceling the subscription, costing the billing company money. What's still not clear is why Perfect 10 feels the need to go after all these companies who were just doing their jobs -- rather than focusing on the companies who actually made copies of its content.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More Google
Just look at this week's edition of Businessweek...
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_15/b4029001.htm
I still rally around Google. They have a lot going for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(sorry, I've been waiting like 3 years to use that crappy line, I got tired of waiting for the right moment. (yes, that was an attempt at humor))
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why the hell not
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's all about money
But Google is easy to find, and easy to sue. And they have shedloads of cash as well. The billing company is probably in the same boat, though obviously less wealthy. All Perfect 10 is doing is suing people who are peripherally related to the original offense who are richer and much easier to find in the hopes that they'll actually get some money out of it. It's pretty much a desperation move made by someone who simply doesn't understand the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Publicity stunt
"Gee they sue you if you even *look* at the photies - those must be some HOT ladies!"
etc etc
if you sue Google you automatically get publicity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
its all about the
:->
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now Perfect 10 & Belgium newspaper sue beacuse they do not want to be listed.
I wonder if someone has sued them twice for both reasons?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now Perfect 10 & Belgium newspaper sue beacuse they do not want to be listed." Read the story again. Read it. Perfect 10 is not suing them because they are being listed. Perfect 10 was suing them because it is displaying their private content and linking it to other sites.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Creating thumbnail images of private data that is not publically accessible IS NOT FAIR USE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google can only link to material where it finds it, or where a site that it finds the material on says to point to for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not sue the electric utility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]