FALA Asks Court to Dismiss Claim Porn Is Not Copyrightable

DENVER — The First Amendment Lawyers Association filed a friend-of-the-court brief yesterday in a case that raises the position that porn is not copyrightable.

The case, which has its roots at federal court in Denver, involves a porn BitTorrent piracy defendant who has made counterclaims in relation to a suit filed against him by Malibu Media.

The piracy defendant, who is now asking a federal judge for $1 million in damages as well as an order declaring Malibu Media's copyrights invalid in relation to the suit filed against him, has called Malibu Media a "copyright troll" that seeks to "pervert the mechanisms" of justice.

But FALA, in an amicus brief filed by its national secretary Marc Randazza seeking an order to dismiss the piracy defendant's counterclaims, said that any notion to declare copyrights invalid because of any connected activity outside the scope of creative works, including the business of going after alleged copyright infringers, could "cast an impermissible pall over both copyright law and the First Amendment."

If accepted, Randazza said, a judge's declaration over the issue could impose new restrictions, or revive long-discredited ones, on what constitutes a “useful art” under the Copyright Clause.

Porn distributors, in particular, would be hit hard hit with a decision going against Malibu Media that Randazza maintains could lead to censorship.

"[The defendant's] position contradicts the Copyright Act and seeks a sweeping, content-based restriction on what genre of works are entitled to copyright protection," he wrote. "This restriction would, if accepted, not only create a Constitutional problem, but a practical one — fragmenting copyright law on the basis of local community standards."

The defendant making counterclaims is Jeff Fantalis, of Louisville, Colo., who was sued along with two others last April for poaching and trading as many as 107 Malibu Media videos after refusing to settle copyright infringement claims.

Fantalis later charged in counterclaims that Malibu Media abused court procedure, invaded his privacy, defamed him, inflicted emotional distress and committed fraud on the Copyright Office.

He noted that Malibu Media is simply a shell corporation and not the author of the films at center of the suit. "In these cases of mass copyright infringement litigation, shell corporations are created in order to buy and register the copyright for pornographic films solely for the purpose of bringing such litigations as this one," Fantalis attorneys wrote in the counterclaim.

To illustrate its business model, Fantalis counsel maintained that Malibu Media registered the movies within two months of the dates of alleged infringement and that the "short span of time between [Malibu Media's] apparent registration of the copyrights and the instant litigation makes it clear that the [Malibu Media] deliberately purchased and registered these particular films with the sole intent of bringing action the John Does it was gathering information about."

As a result, Fantalis attorneys said, Malibu Media was not seeking to protect a valid copyright when it made an application to the U.S. Copyright Office, but rather it was seeking to “pervert the mechanisms of the federal government to its own uses.”

Randazza, an adult industry attorney who leads the Las Vegas-based Randazza Legal Group, noted that if Fanatalis' is successful "casualties of such legal poison will be far-reaching and indiscriminate."

"While the copyright limitations Fantalis seeks may start out aimed at the adult industry, and potentially even solely affecting it, it is certain that it would bleed into other creative sectors and discourage their production as well," he said.

"If we allow the use of censorship as a tool to lash out against an industry that one litigant finds unsavory, the costs will be immeasurable."

View FALA brief

Related:  

Copyright © 2024 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

Pineapple Support Appoints Kasey Kei as Brand Ambassador

Pineapple Support has appointed veteran performer and content creator Kasey Kei as its latest brand ambassador.

Nebraska AV Bill Moves Forward Despite Privacy, Free Speech Concerns

Nebraska’s unicameral Legislature has given first-round approval to LB 1092, the state’s version of the age verification bills being sponsored around the country by anti-porn religious conservative activists.

Eva Maxim, Katrina Colt Headline 'Cumming to LA' From Cherry Kiss

Eva Maxim and Katrina Colt star with Vince Karter in 2021 XBIZ Europas Female Performer of the Year Cherry Kiss' "Cumming to L.A.," from Evil Angel.

AEBN Celebrates 25th Anniversary

The Adult Entertainment Broadcast Network (AEBN) is celebrating its 25th year in business this week.

Performers in Meta Blacklisting Lawsuit Seek to Preserve Antitrust Claims

Adult Performance Artists Guild board officers Alana Evans, Kelly Pierce and Ruby have informed a California court that, although they want to drop their lawsuit claiming that Meta conspired with OnlyFans to blacklist rival premium fan platforms’ talent, they may still pursue antitrust claims in the future.

Skylar Snow Headlines 'Infidelity 4' From Sweet Sinner

Skylar Snow toplines "Infidelity 4," the latest release from Mile High Media studio brand Sweet Sinner.

Serenity Cox Stars in 'Enjoy It' From MILFY

Serenity Cox stars with Alberto Blanco in "Enjoy It," from Vixen Media Group studio imprint MILFY.

Melissa Stratton Stars in Finale of Wicked's 'So Extra'

Melissa Stratton and Robby Apples star in the final scene from Wicked Pictures' "So Extra."

BiPhoria Drops Jim Powers' 'Saying GoodBi'

BiPhoria has released director Jim Powers' "Saying GoodBi."

FSC, Co-Plaintiffs to Ask US Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Texas Age Verification Law

Free Speech Coalition (FSC) and its co-plaintiffs in the challenge to Texas’ controversial age verification law have petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to stay its recent decision upholding the law, because they intend to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to review the law’s constitutionality.

Show More