UPDATE: Google Tries to Knock Out Digital Library Class Action Suit

Image via CrunchBase

Insisting that scanning 20 million books to create the world's largest digital library constitutes a fair use, Google, Inc., last week filed a motion in a New York federal court to dismiss a class action copyright infringement suit, Paid Content (www.paidcontent.org) reports.

The seven-year-old case, The Authors Guild, Inc. et al. v. Google Inc. (Case No. 12-3200) (see "TUOL" posts 9/19/12, 2/19/10) involves a claim by the 8,500-member Guild that Google violated the Digital Millenium Copyright Act [Pub. Law 105-304] by infringing on authors' works.  In its latest motion, Google argues that digital scanning is a transformative use of the copyrighted works and not an infringement. The search engine giant also contends that the authors should not be allowed to sue collectively as a class because many of them allegedly favor the digital scanning.

The Authors Guild wants $750 per book from Google, but Google maintains the scanned versions don't compete with the hand-held existing versions of the books at issue and do not diminish the value of the existing books.

UPDATE: 'Twittersquatting' Plaintiff Drops Suit

Image via CrunchBaseLife settlement company Coventry First has withdrawn its subpoena to Twitter and voluntarily dismissed its lawsuit against anonymous tweeters (see "TUOL" 6/15/11), the ABA Journal Law News Now blog reports.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case,  Coventry First, LLC v. John Does 1-10 (Case No. 2:11-cv-03700) alleged violations of the Lanham Act and the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, along with common law claims of unjust enrichment and unfair competition, arising from sarcastic false tweets under the tag @coventryfirst.  Coventry First said it decided to drop the case after counsel for Public Citizen, which had sought to quash the subpoena to Twitter, revealed the pseudonymous tweeter was not an industry competitor. Public Citizen argued the plaintiff erred procedurally by serving Twitter with a subpoena before seeking court permission via motion to conduct early discovery.

More likely, dismissing the case without prejudice  is a face-saving measure by Coventry First, which faced an uphill battle supporting its claim that the fake tweets amounted to trademark infringement that might confuse consumers.

HuffPo Across the Pond

Image by Getty Images via @daylifeNews aggregator Huffington Post will unveil its United Kingdom version on July 6, reports PaidContent.co.uk.

Former Marie Clare editor Carla Bevan, editor-in-chief of AOL's UK portal, will be at the helm of HuffPo UK, and former BBC political reporter Chris Wimpress will be the site's politics editor, according to the PaidContent post. The Canadian edition of HuffPo recently launched and Arianna Huffington plans to invade France in the near future.

'Twittersquatter' Sued for Trademark Infringement

Image via WikipediaIn Coventry First LLC v. John Does 1-10 (Case No. 2:11-cv-03700), filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, a life settlement industry leader is suing anonymous pranksters who have false-Tweeted messages under the "@coventryfirst" moniker that hope for mass disasters to occur.

As reported by Reuters news service and PaidContent.org, Coventry First's complaint includes claims alleging unjust enrichment, trademark dilution, unfair competition, violation of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act [15 U.S.C. sec. 1125(d)] and trademark infringement under the Lanham Act [15 U.S.C. sec. 1125(a)]. The plaintiff is going after the anonymous posters for approximately 14 offending Tweets.

Coventry First LLC is a player in the life settlement field, in which companies re-sell life insurance policies to investors who pay the premiums and collect the policy proceeds when the insured parties die. The unidentified Tweeters have been sending messages tinged with sarcasm to their approximate 10 followers noting that Coventry and its investor/clients maximize their profits from insured individuals dying before too many premium payments have been made.

Included among the Tweets that have gotten under the skin of the plaintiff are: "Horrible weekend, No plane crashes (they make a lot of money), no earthquakes," and "the faster people die, the more coventry first profits! not even cig companies want their customers to die as fast." 

Among the significant hurdles Coventry First LLC must overcome to prevail are showing that consumers are confused by the faux-Tweets to support its Lanham Act (trademark infringement) claim, a daunting task given the obviously jokey nature of the fake messages.  Also, the anti-cybersquatting statute arguably does not contemplate Twitter user names, but rather, "second level" domain names. Nor is it clear how the plaintiff plans to show the John Does at issue are commercially benefiting from the fake Twitter account.

It will be worth tracking whether this case adds anything to social media jurisprudence or if it just akin to Coventry First yelling out the windows of its corporate headquarters: "Get off of my lawn!"

Plunging Periodical Newstand Sales

Image via Wikipedia

First-half 2010 newsstand sales figures for magazines improved over 2009 results, but that's not saying much.

According to www.MediaWeek.com, citing Magazine Information Network(MagNet) data, first-half newstand sales declined 7.7 percent to more than 451 million units, compared to a 12.4 percent decline in 2009. MagNet, which consolidates magazine wholesaler information, said news, auto and entertainment titles were hardest-hit, while sales of food and sports periodicals actually increased.

Newstand sales account for roughly 13 percent of all magazine circulation. Observers are not optimistic about third-quarter sales results. Changing consumer behavior, the recession, and a spike in the price of magazines, which has climbed since 2008 from an average $4.11 to $4.60, are blamed for the disappointing first-half results.

Meanwhile, the Audit Bureau of Circulations said the average circulation of 440 magazine titles declined 2.3 percent in the first half of 2010 compared to the comparable period in 2009. Playboy and Reader's Digest were the biggest circulation losers, according to accounts in www.Bloomberg.com and www.PaidContent.org.