Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Don’t blame the middleman for pilfered Internet porn. A federal judge in San Jose has decided that credit card companies cannot be held liable for copyright infringements committed by their customers. The ruling by U.S. District Judge James Ware shut down a suit filed by Perfect 10, a Beverly Hills-based purveyor of online pornography. The outfit had sued several companies involved with payments over the Internet, including Visa and MasterCard, for completing transactions at sites that sold stolen Perfect 10 images. “The ability to process credit cards does not directly assist the allegedly infringing Web sites in copying plaintiff’s works,” Ware wrote in a ruling issued in August. “Defendants do not provide the means for distributing those works to others, nor do they provide bandwidth or storage space with which to transfer or store the works.” Perfect 10, which had sued under the theories of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement, wanted the credit card companies held liable for facilitating the buying and selling of the stolen images. But Ware rejected all of the plaintiff’s arguments. “From the beginning, we knew it would probably be decided by a higher court,” said Howard King, a partner at King, Holmes, Paterno & Berliner in Los Angeles who represented Perfect 10. “I didn’t see a lot of rays of hope in Judge Ware’s opinion.” Fred von Lohmann, senior intellectual property attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, hailed the decision, calling it an important step in the fight against overzealous copyright holders. “It gives us a clear outer limit for � copyright infringement,” he said. The Perfect 10 case is one of two matters in the Northern District of California that tests the limits of copyright liability. The other case, which stems from litigation filed against investors in Napster, the online file-sharing system, is a descendant of the earlier copyright infringement dispute that originally embroiled Napster. Earlier this summer, Northern District Chief Judge Marilyn Hall Patel decided that the new Napster case, UMG Recordings v. Bertelsmann AG, could proceed. Record companies want investors held liable for infringement of copyrighted songs. Von Lohmann’s group, which opposes the suit, was disappointed by Patel’s decision because it doesn’t want courts to determine that “liability climbs the ladder,” he said. Michael Page, a partner at San Francisco’s Keker & Van Nest who represents First Data Corp. in the Perfect 10 litigation, agreed that the cases were creating important new law. “These cases � are all about trying to hold someone else who didn’t infringe on a copyright liable,” said Page, who also represents Hummer Winblad Venture Partners in the pending Napster case. In his Perfect 10 ruling, Ware said the legal issue comes down to what degree the credit card companies can control Internet businesses. It is not enough, the judge wrote, for “the defendants to merely have contributed to the general business of the infringer. To have materially contributed to copyright infringement, the � assistance must bear some direct relationship to the infringing acts.” Ware’s ruling cited the older Napster case, A&M Records v. Napster, 239 F.3d 1004, as an example of “substantial contributing conduct” because Napster provided an online index of copyright-protected songs available for free online trading. Jeff Chorney is a reporter at The Recorder, where he covers federal court news.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.