Another Section 512(f) Case Fails–ISE v. Longarzo

This ruling doesn’t break a lot of new doctrinal ground. Another 512(f) case fails–nothing new. I’m blogging mostly for completeness and as a follow up to my May post remarking that a 512(f) case survived a motion to dismiss. At the time, I said, “If you’re a 512(f) enthusiast, you know better than to get too excited about this ruling. The math still strongly indicates ISE will lose on 512(f).” On summary judgment, the case reached its expected denouement. I previously summarized the case: the litigants dispute ownership over a TV show, “The Weekend in Vegas.” ISE posted the video to Amazon. A defendant asked Amazon to remove it, which Amazon did. Among other claims, ISE sued the defendants for violating 512(f), saying the requests to Amazon were improper takedown demands. This opinion provides some details about the so-called takedown notices. The first notice read “Use of my name and/or image/likeness is an…

Read more detail on Recent Legal Marketing posts –

This entry was posted in Legal Marketing and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply