LOS ANGELES — Another copyright infringement case has been filed charging unfair business practices because the defendants allegedly violated 2257.
Dreamroom said in the complaint that after it served takedown notices to the websites via its Internet service provider, its operator has taken down nearly all of the material but has not compensated the Los Angeles adult studio.
The suit, filed against Suavemente Inc., The Media Planet and 10 John Does, asks for damages relating to copyright infringement, including vicarious and contributory infringement.
It also charges that the defendants violated the California Business and Professional Code §17200 because it lacks necessary record-keeping docs of adult performers.
Plaintiffs using the 2257 weapon in copyright infringement suits say that legitimate porn distributors spend enormous sums to comply with the law and the defendants aren't.
"Defendants have committed and are continuing to commit acts of unfair competition as defined by §17200 by violating 18 U.S.C. §2257 and the implementing regulations," Dreamroom's suit said.
It's the third copyright infringement suit within a month to employ 2257 claims in a complaint to show possible unfair business practices.
Motherless.com and its operator Joshua Lange were named to a Pink Visual suit filed at U.S. District Court at Los Angeles last month using that tactic. So were 995 John Doe BitTorrent users who are alleged to have shared the “Paris Hilton Sex Tape.”
The first porn suit to use the 2257 angle in a copyright infringement suit, industry observers say, is the Vivid vs. PornoTube suit that was filed in 2008.
Ronald Larson, Dreamroom's counsel, did not immediately respond to XBIZ for comment. Operators for SukiSuki69.com and 2Candys.com were unavailable for comment.