RSS
Perfect 10 Case Against Google Dismissed (With Prejudice) After Court Asks Perfect 10 To Open Its Books
from the a-perfect-0 dept
In the same week that Perfect 10 sued Tumblr for alleged copyright infringement, it effectively lost one of its other key lawsuits: agreeing to a dismissal, with prejudice, in its quixotic case against Google that had so far resulted in a string of losses (and useful precedents). Part of the stipulated settlement is that Perfect 10 will never again sue Google over such claims in the past (going forward is another story).
As the TorrentFreak article linked above notes, Perfect 10 was so desperate to find some sort of evidence to use against Google, it offered $25,000 to anyone who could provide evidence that Google "aided or condoned copyright infringement." Considering how often we see people (especially in our own comments) insist that Google does this all the time, it sure seems like when it was time to present evidence no one could come up with a damn thing. And that's not surprising, because if you know anything about anything, you'd know that Google is actually pretty aggressive against infringement (sometimes over-aggressive) -- and contrary to the claims of people who seem to know nothing about online advertising, there's little money made in any advertising around infringement anyway.
What's more interesting is that, as TorrentFreak notes again, this sudden agreement to dismiss the case with prejudice comes after the court had ordered that Perfect 10 open up its books and "provide full insight into all internal communications regarding the court case." Given the accusations concerning Perfect 10's business practices (i.e., supposedly relying on such lawsuits as its business model), perhaps they felt it was better to keep that stuff from being revealed publicly.
As the TorrentFreak article linked above notes, Perfect 10 was so desperate to find some sort of evidence to use against Google, it offered $25,000 to anyone who could provide evidence that Google "aided or condoned copyright infringement." Considering how often we see people (especially in our own comments) insist that Google does this all the time, it sure seems like when it was time to present evidence no one could come up with a damn thing. And that's not surprising, because if you know anything about anything, you'd know that Google is actually pretty aggressive against infringement (sometimes over-aggressive) -- and contrary to the claims of people who seem to know nothing about online advertising, there's little money made in any advertising around infringement anyway.
What's more interesting is that, as TorrentFreak notes again, this sudden agreement to dismiss the case with prejudice comes after the court had ordered that Perfect 10 open up its books and "provide full insight into all internal communications regarding the court case." Given the accusations concerning Perfect 10's business practices (i.e., supposedly relying on such lawsuits as its business model), perhaps they felt it was better to keep that stuff from being revealed publicly.
I have an app...
Developer Census: Be Counted. It takes less than two minutes.
App Developer Conversations: What Does The iPad Mini Mean For The App Economy?
I have a business...
Why 50,000 Monthly Active Users Weren't Enough To Stop This Company From Pivoting, With Spun Co-Founder Scott Lindenbaum
The Talent Wars: Today's Toughest Startup Challenge
I have an idea...
Finding Co-Founders in a Recovering Economy
75 Questions To Help You Write An RFP For Website Design
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
:-D
"Big smile! Big smile! ... Big smile!"
I'm very glad to hear Google's ninja attorneys are finally earning their paychecks rather than opting for the lazy/quick 'settle out of court' route, which is ultimately futile.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Patent Trolls - 0
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
People assume that lawsuits are a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a nonlinear, non-subjective viewpoint, they're more like a big ball of wibbley-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Of course Google's evil!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
*put sunglasses on*
got a perfect 10.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Patent Trolls - 0
If you take into account that the Java/Android case is going mostly in their favour.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I misread the title...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Patent Trolls - 0
If you take into account that the Java/Android case is going mostly in their favour."
That's like counting a goal before it's scored...
It's 1-0 right now...A very good chance it'll end up 2-0 in the near future though.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Started well, that sentence... :)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This sentence has me a little confused. Certainly the judge doesn't think the P10 execs are going to build a time-traveling DeLorean, fly into the past, and attempt to sue Google all over again? Seriously, though, might want to clarify what that sentence is supposed to mean. Or maybe it's just that I don't speak legalese.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment