Lessig challenges DMCA takedown notice

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Lessig challenges DMCA takedown notice

Know your enemy. Did Australian company record company Liberation Music bear this advice in mind when it requested that YouTube block the video of a lecture titled “Open” given by Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig?

Yesterday Lessig – a well-known political activist and critic of the copyright systemretaliated, asking the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts to grant declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and damages. He is represented by lawyers from the law firm Jones Day and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The dispute concerns a lecture Lessig gave at a Creative Commons conference in Seoul, Korea in June 2010. The lecture included several clips of amateur music videos to illustrate cultural developments in the age of the internet.

The clips included groups of people dancing to the song “Lisztomania” by the band Phoenix, which is represented by Liberation Music. Lessig claims his use of the clips is permitted under the fair use doctrine and does not infringe copyright.

In June 2013, a video of the lecture was posted on YouTube. On June 30, Lessig received a notice from YouTube saying the video of his lecture had been blocked under its filtering procedures as it included content owned or licensed by Viacom (the notice, included in the court documents, was addressed “Dear lessig”).

It is believed that Liberation Music sought to block the video at about the same time.

When Lessig disputed the block, Liberation Music issued a DMCA takedown notice, demanding the removal of the video. When Lessig submitted a counter-notice, Liberation Music emailed him threatening legal proceedings within 72 hours and he retracted his counter-notice.

Lessig’s suit seeks a declaration that the video of the lecture is protected by the fair use doctrine and does not infringe copyright as well as an order enjoining Liberation from asserting a copyright claim against him. He is also seeking damages, costs and other just relief.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
Gift this article