As some of you may remember, in January 2011 Puerto 80 S.L.U. got seized its domains rojadirecta.com and rojadirecta.org.
Yesterday August 29th, The Honorable Paul A. Crotty, District Judge at the Southern District of New York, ordered the warrants of seizure to be vacated and the domains returned.
Previously, the same day, the District Attorney Preet Bharara submitted a letter to advise the Court that “…as a result of certain recent judicial authority involving issues germane to the above-captioned action, and in light of the particular circumstances of this litigation, the Government now seeks to dismiss its amended forfeiture complaint.”
I guess the “certain recent judicial authority involving issues germane to the above-captioned action” are Flava Works, Inc. v. Gunter, — F.3d —-, 2012 WL 3124826 (7th Cir. Aug. 2, 2012) cited in a Notice of Supplemental Authority submitted to the court by the defendants last August 8th.
It literally says:
The court concluded that that the plaintiff was not likely to succeed on its claim that the “myVidster” website was liable for direct or contributory copyright infringement by hosting and embedding links to infringing copies of the plaintiff’s videos, which were not hosted by myVidster.
The Flava Works opinion supports the position that the seized domain names are neither committing, enabling or assisting infringement by engaging in the conduct alleged by the government in the Amended Complaint. The Seventh Circuit explained that because watching a streaming video is not infringement (any more than sneaking into a theater and watching a copyrighted movie is infringement), providing a link to where a streaming video is hosted does not encourage or assist infringement.