opinion

CASE Act Offers New Anti-Piracy Option for Adult Creators

CASE Act Offers New Anti-Piracy Option for Adult Creators

Content theft has been the bane of adult content creators’ existence since the advent of the internet. Given the ease with which content can be copied and republished on tube sites, file lockers and “leak” sites, unsavory content thieves have been able to earn a comfortable living by committing widespread copyright infringement.

Until now, the only realistic legal option for content creators has been to send DMCA notices to infringing websites or their hosts, and hope that they comply with U.S. copyright law by taking down the infringing content. Anything further required extensive federal court litigation along with a registration issued by the U.S. Copyright Office. If the infringement occurred before the copyright registration, the creator was ordinarily limited to recovering only actual damages and unable to seek recovery of attorneys’ fees. Such litigation could take years to finish and substantial resources to pursue.

Adult content creators and producers should familiarize themselves with this new option for combating piracy of their valuable content and consider pursuing claims where appropriate; the new CASE Act procedures are quicker and far less expensive than federal court litigation.

That is all about to change. Adult content creators in the United States will soon have a new option to recover “small claims” money damages for copyright infringement, thanks to the Copyright Alternative in Smalls-Claims Enforcement Act. Passed in December 2020, the CASE Act allows a copyright holder to file an administrative claim with the U.S. Copyright Office to recover up to $30,000 in damages for infringement by copyright thieves. Administrators have been drafting the regulations that will govern how these proceedings will work.

UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS

On April 25, 2022, the U.S. Copyright Office adopted a rule which sets forth the procedures for bringing these claims, opting out of proceedings, and filing responses through the new Copyright Claims Board created by the CASE Act. As an alternative to expensive and time-consuming federal court litigation, the new CCB is a voluntary administrative forum for resolving certain copyright disputes valued at $30,000 or less.

What does it cost?

The rule adopts a two-tiered fee structure which requires a $40 filing fee followed by a $60 payment once all respondents have been served and the opt-out period expires. This structure is meant to ensure that the fees for filing a claim under the CCB are not cost-prohibitive, while also being costly enough to deter frivolous claims. There is no fee to file a counterclaim.

How are claims filed?

Claims must be filed electronically with the CCB and must include the identity of the parties, the category of the work, the registration status of the work, the type of claim, the harm experienced, the relief sought and other relevant facts, along with an affirmation confirming the accuracy of the information in the claim.

The Copyright Office will issue educational materials to assist claimants in filing claims. The CCB will review the claims to determine if sufficient information has been provided to place the respondent on notice. If not, the CCB will require the claimant to provide more details. Claims by unrepresented claimants will be construed liberally to satisfy the review requirements.

What information must be shared?

In an effort to facilitate settlements and discovery, claimants and respondents must provide contact information, their own or their attorney’s. Generally, the claimant must also provide the respondent’s address. However, this requirement can be waived if the claimant can show that the three-year statute of limitations is likely to expire within 30 days of filing the claim. In such cases, the claimant will have to provide the respondent’s address before the claim can continue, but not at the time of filing.

Can claims be dismissed?

A party may request dismissal of a claim or counterclaim for unsuitability, at any time. The CCB may also raise the issue. The opposing party will have the opportunity to respond.

How will respondents be notified of a claim?

An initial notice of proceeding will be created by the CCB but must be served by the claimant on the respondent along with the claim. The initial notice will describe the CCB, the nature of CCB proceedings, basic information about the claim and claimant, the respondent’s right to opt out, the consequences of opting out or proceeding, as well as information on how to learn more about copyright and the CCB, available defenses and differences between federal litigation and CCB proceedings. The initial notice will also include references to pro bono legal assistance. Proof of service or a waiver must be filed within seven days of service.

Further, claimants must not include with the service of the initial notice any additional substantive communications such as settlement demands or exhibits that were not filed as part of the claim. Good faith settlement discussions are encouraged during the opt-out period but must occur separately from service.

A second notice of proceeding will be issued by the CCB to the respondent no later than 20 days after the claimant files a proof of service or a completed waiver, provided the respondent has not opted out. The second notice mirrors the initial notice in substance.

Can companies designate an agent for service of claims?

Probably. The Copyright Office is currently considering a separate rule which would allow corporations, partnerships, and other unincorporated associations to designate agents to receive service of the initial notice and claim. If a designated agent is listed, the claimant must serve the claim upon that agent. Designating an agent can help avoid missing a notice of claim and ensure the company has sufficient time to decide whether to opt out.

Can respondents waive personal service?

Yes. Claimants may request, by mail or other reasonable means, that the respondent sign a waiver of personal service form. Waiving service can provide potential benefits to both parties in some circumstances.

How can a respondent opt out?

To opt out of a CCB proceeding, the respondent must file a paper or electronic form within 60 days of service and provide the docket number, verification code, certain identifying information and a signed affirmation. Opting out of the CCB proceeding requires the claimant to file traditional federal litigation to pursue the claim further.

Respondents may request an extension of the 60-day opt out period when such extension is in the interests of justice.

Claimants generally cannot refile a claim for the same acts or theories of recovery after a respondent opts out. However, if the respondent opts out and later changes their mind in favor of proceeding before the CCB, the claimant may refile the claim with the respondent’s consent.

How are responses filed?

Responses must be electronically filed and contain identifying information and details concerning the dispute, including any defenses and relevant evidence, along with a certification that the information provided in the response is accurate and truthful. The Office will provide respondents with a list of common defenses in the notification form and its educational materials.

Can the respondent file a counterclaim?

Yes. Respondents may file counterclaims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence as a claim, and implicate copyright or an agreement affecting the relief to be awarded. Counterclaims must be asserted in the response, unless good cause exists for allowing a later counterclaim. Once a response with a counterclaim is filed by the respondent, a claimant may not withdraw or opt out from the CCB proceeding.

FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The new CASE Act procedures are quicker and far less expensive than federal court litigation, so adult content creators and producers should familiarize themselves with this new option for combating piracy of their valuable content and consider pursuing claims where appropriate. Media outlets and online platforms should likewise become educated on these issues and evaluate potential designation of an agent for receiving notice of claims to avoid lost or misdirected notices which could result in up to $30,000 in liability if not addressed.

This new option for pursuing copyright infringement is about to heat up, so expect significant activity in this area in the near future.

Walters Law Group represents content creators throughout the world in connection with intellectual property enforcement issues. Nothing in this article is intended as legal advice. For further information, visit firstamendment.com/contact-us/ or reach out on social media @walterslawgroup.

Related:  

Copyright © 2026 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 Articles

profile

BranditScan's Aerie Saunders on Fostering Creator Knowledge, Confidence and Community

Aerie Saunders is firmly in her season. When she sits down with XBIZ, a fall-scented WoodWick candle burns in the background, pumpkins decorate her desk and the first signs of spooky season are already on display. Not that Saunders waits until autumn to embrace the macabre.

Jackie Backman ·
opinion

What Mastercard's Scam Monitoring Program Means for Adult Merchants

Mastercard's Scam Merchant Monitoring Program (SMMP) has introduced a new, investigation-led framework that works very differently from the ratio-based chargeback programs the industry has relied on for years. It applies to card-not-present merchants globally, and Mastercard's guidance on business models warranting closer attention includes adult content and dating platforms, along with subscription services, digital goods and forex.

Len Garcia ·
opinion

Why the Right Merchant Category Code Matters for NSFW AI Businesses

You explained exactly what your NSFW AI business does to your payment processor and they seemed to get it. The underwriting process felt thorough and exhausting, but it was well worth it because you began processing.

Jonathan Corona ·
trends

How Local Payments Can Expand Access and Reduce Friction at Checkout

Global adult platforms often enter new markets with a familiar assumption: If their checkout accepts major cards, they're ready for local customers. In reality, payment habits vary widely by country. Dutch consumers use iDEAL for online shopping, BLIK is a leading e-commerce payment method in Poland, and India's UPI handles billions of transactions each month.

Mitch Platt ·
opinion

How Detailed Receipts Build Consumer Trust and Reduce Chargeback

When was the last time you bought something online? Chances are you looked for the confirmation almost immediately. Did the transaction go through? Does it show what you bought? Were you charged correctly? And if there's a problem, who can you contact?

Cathy Beardsley ·
opinion

What Adult Platforms Should Know About the EU AI Act

The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act is now largely in force, creating new obligations for adult platforms using AI for content creation, performer verification, age estimation, moderation and other functions.

Corey Silverstein ·
opinion

How Native Spanish Speakers Help Pleasure Brands Expand Across Latin America

Latin America's Spanish-speaking markets represent an exciting growth opportunity for the pleasure products industry. Across the region, conversations about sexual wellness are becoming more open, specialty retailers are expanding their assortments and shoppers are seeking products that reflect their lifestyles and values.

Rin Musick ·
opinion

Why Retail Expertise Is Essential When AI Tools Analyze Store Data

Somewhere in one of our stores, someone scanned a barcode into a quantity field. The number entered was 8,388,607. At $19.99 per unit, that made a single line item worth roughly $167 million. The number was so large that the import failed immediately.

Zondre Watson ·
profile

Vendo CEO Mitch Platt Reflects on 20 Years of Lessons and Evolution

More than 20 years ago, three entrepreneurs in Barcelona began gathering over beers to pitch, dissect and routinely destroy one another's business ideas. The ritual was simple: One person arrived with a concept, while the other two tried to expose every weakness. Any proposal that survived earned another look. Most did not.

Jackie Backman ·
opinion

How to Avoid the Hidden Risks of AI-Generated Legal Documents

Artificial intelligence can write a contract in seconds, but that does not mean it can write the contract your business actually needs. Across the adult industry, operators, creators and producers are increasingly using generative AI to prepare model releases, performer agreements, privacy policies, takedown notices, employment documents and responses to regulators. The appeal is obvious: Legal work is expensive, AI is fast and the resulting document often looks impressively professional. That polished appearance is exactly what makes the practice dangerous.

Corey Silverstein ·
Show More