Can websites and blogs be liable for copyright infringement?  It depends.  If the blog owner is copying other creators’ content verbatim (in whole or in part), depending on the facts at hand (perhaps there is a “fair use” defense), such copying would generally open the blog writer up to liability for copyright infringement.  This can hold true even if the content is posted by other users of the website or blog.

Protect your blog and website from copyright infringement lawsuits.  Someone found guilty of willful infringement can be liable for statutory damages of up to $150,000 per infringement as well as attorneys’ fees and legal costs.

However, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, online services providers, blogs and websites can be shielded from copyright liability for other users’ posted content, if, among other things, the online service provider / website (1) has designated an agent to receive notifications of claimed infringement (also know as “takedown” notices) by registering contact information with the Copyright Office and by posting such information on the service provider’s website in a location accessible to the public and (2) promptly remove infringing material at the request of a the lawful copyright holder.   This is known as the safe-harbor provisions.  See §512(c) of the Copyright Act.

Once a website receives a compliant notification of claimed infringement, it must expeditiously try to remove, or disable access to, the allegedly infringing material, in order for the service provider seeks to receive the benefits of the safe harbor provisions.   A website is not required by law to remove the allegedly infringing material – but note that by receiving such notice, and not removing the claimed infringing material, the website may be secondarily liability (contributory infringement) for continuing to host the allegedly infringing material.

If you are an online service provider, host a blog, or run a website that allows users to post content, you should register a DMCA agent by completing a DCMA agent form (found here) and sending the completed form along with $105 to Copyright RRP, Box 71537, Washington, D.C., 20024.  If additional, alternative names are filed with the Copyright Office, each group of 10 alternative names (or fewer) adds an additional fee (currently $30), to the $105 basic filing fee.

Once registered, the website is then listed on the Copyright Office’s Directory of Service Provider Agents for Notification of Claims of Infringement so that in the event of an infringement, you want to make it easy for the legitimate copyright holder to find the online service provider and know where to send a takedown notice.

If you have any questions about filing an agent registration or if you have questions about possibly infringing content or have received a takedown notice, you should contact an Internet Attorney.

Every few weeks, I get called by the media for an interview regarding a current news story.   On this particular day, I got a call from Catherine Holahan, a reporter with BusinessWeek.  Back in  2007, Jayant and Rajat Agarwalla created Scrabulous, the online Scrabble knockoff that became a smash on Facebook.  When Hasbro, which owns the North American rights to Scrabble, filed suit for intellectual property infringement, the brothers removed the game from Facebook after the social network received a takedown notice from Hasbro’s lawyers alleging that Scrabulous violated its copyright and, therefore, Facebook’s terms of service. The brothers then reinvented their game as Wordscraper.  But a board game is not only protected under trademark laws for its brand name of the game, but is also protected under copyright law with respect  to the expression of the game.

Would changing the name from Scrabulous to Wordscraper be enough to satisfy Hasbro? The change of the name could help them on the trademark side. The new name would have to be so that it is not confusingly similar to “Scrabble.”  The question would be, under copyright law, is the expression of the new game so substantially similar that it would still constitute copyright infringement?  I explained to the reporter that ideas are as free as the wind. Courts don’t enforce the protection of an idea, they will however, enforce the way the idea is carried out or expressed. For example, the creators of Superman can’t protect the idea of a super strong person who saves people from criminals. They can, however, enforce their rights if someone created a hero who wears a blue suit with a red cape and flies around saving people when not working at a major metropolitan newspaper. Generally, courts are looking at whether a plaintiff can prove substantial similarity and access to the copyrighted expression.  Read the full article, Scrabulous Now Wordscraper, Hasbro Still Suing, by Catherine Holahan, BusinessWeek.

**This post is for informational purposes only, For legal advice contact an internet attorney**