TAG

Platform procedure

Takedown, counter-notice, and intermediary process.

IP-03 · 01

DMCA Takedown and Counter-Notice Procedures for Online Content

9 MIN · IP

Section 512 gives copyright owners a fast removal route and gives accused users a statutory answer. This brief maps both filings, their clocks, and the liability each one creates.

A takedown notice must carry six statutory elements; only the authorization statement is sworn under penalty of perjury, not the infringement claim itself.
A counter-notice does not decide who owns anything. It restarts a clock and forces the sender to sue or let the material return.
Storage providers that follow the statute restore contested material not less than 10 and not more than 14 business days after a valid counter-notice.

Read the full brief →

IP-08 · 02

Advertising Claims: Substantiation and False Advertising Exposure

10 MIN · IP

Two systems police advertising claims at once: an agency that asks whether you had proof before you spoke, and competitors who can sue you for the sales you took.

The FTC requires a reasonable basis for an objective claim before it is disseminated, not assembled afterwards in response to an inquiry.
The claim being tested is what consumers reasonably take away, including implied messages, not the literal words the advertiser chose.
Lanham Act 43(a) lets a competitor sue over false or misleading commercial advertising and recover damages, profits, and sometimes fees.

Read the full brief →

IP-09 · 03

Fair Use in Commercial Content: Applying the Four Factors

10 MIN · IP

Fair use is a defence decided case by case, not a rule with safe amounts. This brief works through the four statutory factors as a commercial publisher has to apply them.

Section 107 lists four factors and no safe harbours; there is no percentage, word count, or number of seconds that is automatically fair.
The first factor asks whether the new use has a genuinely different purpose, weighed against its commercial character as a matter of degree.
In 2023 the Supreme Court's Warhol decision tightened that analysis where a secondary use substitutes for the original's own licensing market.

Read the full brief →