Perfect 10 Still Suing Anyone And Everyone They Can

from the not-what-copyright-law-was-for dept

You may recall the company Perfect 10 — a purveyor of pornographic images — which made a name for itself suing Google. It was an odd case with an odd decision. Basically, Perfect 10 was upset that some other websites (not Google) had taken their photos and placed them on free websites. Google then indexed those sites, and would display thumbnails for the images in its image search. According to Perfect 10, this is copyright infringement — even though it wasn’t Google that had done the copying, but other sites. Also, this was odd because courts have found that thumbnails linking to full images are fair use. Either way, what became clear was that Perfect 10 wasn’t exactly concerned with how things got where the were — it just wanted to sue anyone who touched its photos in any way. So, it probably shouldn’t come as a surprise that the company is also suing various payment processors who process payments for other porn sites. Once again, the situation is that these other porn sites made unauthorized copies of the photos, but are then charging fees to access the content. The billing company have absolutely no way of knowing how these sites got their content, but Perfect 10 is arguing that since they profited from these sites anyway, they’re liable. So far, the courts don’t appear all that sympathetic to the reasoning — but the appeals court has just sent it back to the lower court to examine whether one of the billing sites lost its DMCA safe harbor provisions by cutting off Perfect 10’s credit card. The billing company says it did so for perfectly legitimate reasons: Perfect 10 kept buying subscriptions to various sites and then canceling the subscription, costing the billing company money. What’s still not clear is why Perfect 10 feels the need to go after all these companies who were just doing their jobs — rather than focusing on the companies who actually made copies of its content.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Perfect 10 Still Suing Anyone And Everyone They Can”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Chris says:

why the hell not

Suing these days is only ever about making money. Why woulndn’t you go after everyone you possibly could if it might result in a nice fat settlement, possibly even out of court. There’s plenty of businesses around that simply wouldn’t exist if they couldn’t sue everyone and their mother for somehow infringing on “their content.”

Kevin says:

It's all about money

The problem is simple: lots of porn site operators are a bit on the shady side. Ones that steal other people’s content are almost always on the shady side. This makes it harder to track them down, sue them, and actually get any money once you win.

But Google is easy to find, and easy to sue. And they have shedloads of cash as well. The billing company is probably in the same boat, though obviously less wealthy. All Perfect 10 is doing is suing people who are peripherally related to the original offense who are richer and much easier to find in the hopes that they’ll actually get some money out of it. It’s pretty much a desperation move made by someone who simply doesn’t understand the law.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

by John on Apr 11th, 2007 @ 9:28am
Now Perfect 10 & Belgium newspaper sue beacuse they do not want to be listed.

Read the story again. Read it. Perfect 10 is not suing them because they are being listed. Perfect 10 was suing them because it is displaying their private content and linking it to other sites.

|333173|3|_||3 says:

Google were not linking to private data, they were linking to publicly availabel data which happened to have been gained illegally. They should npot be liable, any moe than if they had linked to a site contianing illegal content (kiddie pr0n, terrorist materail), possilby even less liable, since the material was not in and of itself illgal so google’s bots could nto readily tell that there was any problem linking to it.
Google can only link to material where it finds it, or where a site that it finds the material on says to point to for it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...