3 ms·
Your cites don't say what you think they say. For starters, the first link is for a motion to dismiss, A motion to dismiss merely assesses whether the plaintif
by gamblor956 6y ago
Your cites don't say what you think they say.
For starters, the first link is for a motion to dismiss, A motion to dismiss merely assesses whether the plaintiff has made sufficient claims in its pleading to keep the case going. It's not a substantive ruling on the merits of anything. And second, it was related to a "tortious interference with business expectancy claim" which required the plaintiff to have a business that was interfered with as a result of the defendant's false trademark violation claim, and that harm actually resulted from the defendant's false claim. (The case is still going, and both sides have filed competing motions for summary judgment.)
The second case was a tortious interfence case in which the defendant also made false allegations of counterfeiting, which led to Amazon removing the plaintiff's products from the store, so I'm assuming you brought it up because you are going to argue that the RIAA will make factually false statements of fact against you if you make a copy of the youtube-dl repository.
If that's your plan, good luck, because you're going to need it. You're definitely going to want to hire better lawyers, too, if your current lawyers have advised you that you could beat the RIAA in these circumstances.
- ikeboy 6y agoI'm well aware of the differences between a motion to dismiss, summary judgment, and awards at trial. A ruling on a motion to dismiss shows that the law applies to a situation as alleged in the complaint. As I said in the comment you originally responded to, damages are likely to be negligible, which is why I wouldn't bring such a claim. You didn't explain what objection you had to the concept of tortious interference as it relates to a takedown request, so I just checked my database for examples of successful tortious interference claims at any stage. (I'm following over 100 similar cases where people or companies harmed by false infringement claims sued.) To the extent you were objecting because I lack a relevant contract, I don't see why the GitHub contract isn't sufficient. The biggest issue is damages. And as I said above, the plan is to file a declaratory judgement claim, which definitely applies if I can get standing. Whether a tortious interference claim would work depends on a number of factors including the exact details of a hypothetical RIAA takedown request, and as I said I don't plan on pursuing one anyway.