Through the DMCA Notices and other means, Frontier had knowledge that its network was being used for copyright infringement on a massive scale Frontier also knew which specific subscribers engaged in such repeated and flagrant infringement.įrontier facilitated, encouraged, and materially contributed to such infringement by continuing to provide its network and the facilities necessary for its subscribers to commit repeated infringements.įrontier had the means to withhold that assistance upon learning of specific infringing activity by specific users but failed to do so. Here are the Plaintiffs’ general contributory copyright infringement arguments: The Plaintiffs make two claims for relief: (1) contributory copyright infringement and (2) vicarious copyright infringement. Īccording to the complaint, the 2,856 infringements at issue in the lawsuit, which began on May 1, 2021, are purported to have occurred after Frontier received multiple notices of subscribers’ infringing activity, and are ongoing. Frontier has received hundreds of thousands of copyright infringement notices from copyright owners, including Plaintiffs, but chose not to act on those notices and address the rampant infringement on its network.
#Dmca copyright infringement download#
Like similar past lawsuits filed against other large ISPs, the record companies claim Frontier ignored the DMCA infringement notices and did not terminate broadband subscribers identified as repeat infringers:Īt all pertinent times, Frontier knew that its subscribers were using its high-speed network to illegally download and distribute Plaintiffs’ sound recordings on Frontier’s network. They say Frontier knew about this because they sent Frontier infringement notices alerting “Frontier of its subscribers’ blatant and systematic use of Frontier’s Internet service to illegally download, copy, and distribute copyrighted works through illicit BitTorrent sites and other online file-sharing services.” These infringement notices, the Plaintiffs claim, show Frontier had “direct knowledge of particular subscribers engaging in specific, repeated acts of infringement.” The record company Plaintiffs allege Frontier is secondarily liable for its broadband subscribers’ direct infringement of 2,856 copyrighted works. The Gist Of The Suit – Frontier Broadband Subscribers Made Multiple Illegal Downloads Sony Music Entertainment, Arista Music, Arista Records LLC, Sony Music Entertainment US Latin, and Zomba Recording LLC and Plaintiffs Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Lava Records LLC, Rhino Entertainment LLC, Warner Music Inc., Warner Music International Services Limited, and Warner Records Inc. The 15 record company Plaintiffs are UMG Recordings, Inc., Capitol Records, LLC, and ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The record companies claim that Frontier is secondarily liable for its broadband subscribers’ direct copyright infringement, and that “Frontier’s contribution to its subscribers’ infringement is both willful and material.” The lawsuit was filed in U.S.
have filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Frontier Communications, one of the largest Internet service providers in the country.
J– Another one! Some of the largest record companies in the U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
