I know! When I was 13 I desperately wanted to read the Vampire Chronicles, but they were checked out at my local library, so I just took something else from "the same author". Whoops!

Considering the other sexy Anne Rice adaptation, I am sure this will be "hilariously funny" too!

I never said her DMCA was false. If she says she owns the copyright, I assume she does. Further, the concept of "work for hire" instantly conveys copyright in many circumstances. . Ask Miguel Calderon.

I haven't seen the images. However, it's easy enough to say they were works for hire. You hand someone your phone and say "take my picture" you could easily argue that you own that image, not the person who pushed the button. Not to mention, what asshole would take naked pictures of her and then not be on good enough…

No. It works perfectly. Google and YouTube are 100% protected and I bet that Scientology didn't even begin to bring suit against them. When you're an ISP, the DMCA works very well.

The concept of "work for hire" has a far reaching effect. She could easily claim that the photos are self portraits she commissioned by asking the photographer to take them using her camera. There doesn't need to be financial incentive involved. Again, I have no idea what the pictures look like. But I'd guess the…

No they don't. Lawrence can file a DMCA notification asserting that she is the copyright holder. She only has to prove same in court if the user who uploaded the material claims she isn't the copyright holder. The porn site is in no position (according to US law) to demand she prove a thing.

What makes you think her copyright claim is false? I haven't seen the pictures, but people seem to refer to them as if they're selfies. From the articles, it appears the porn site is simply saying her claim is false. They don't have the power to decide that. Only a judge does.

Yeah. That's a good point. I haven't really gotten into determining if the Post or TMZ story are full of shit or not. I'm assuming the story is accurate and just going by what's there.

International copyright is not my specialty. However, intl rules dictate that the owner is the owner, despite the processes being a little different. She could keep submitting DMCAs further and further upstream with a higher degree of success, I imagine. But easier than that, if the website is international, simply…

I haven't seen these images, so I don't know what they're of other than Jennifer Lawrence. However, the ISP can't use any argument at all without jeopardizing their safe harbor. By trying to play judge on who owns the copyright, they are essentially telling her to fuck off, they can do what they want. The DMCA safe…

I work in information security and have been in the industry for 15 years. I try to make my clients' networks and severs secure so that breaches don't happen to begin with. iCloud has two step authentication which is great. I think they should force people to use it.

"Fair Use" is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement. That means that you plea to the court, "Yes, I did infringe this copyright, but I did it for reasons." Also, if your posting receives a DMCA notification, you can simply submit a Counter DMCA notification if you feel that your posting falls under "fair…

Right. If they have received a properly formatted DMCA notification from Lawrence's people the porn site's lawyers are choosing to waive or risk safe harbor to keep the images up, they're being incredibly foolish and taking a huge risk. I think someone is being dumb. Not exactly sure who. But this quote from the…

There really isn't much more to it where the ISP (porn site) is concerned. The person asserting copyright, must have a "good faith" believe that they are the copyright holder, yes. Other wise it is fraud. The penalties are spelled out in the DMCA itself for submitting false DMCAs.

It can be frustrating, I agree. But if you feel someone is using DMCA to stifle your speech and you are actually the copyright holder, just submit a Counter-Notification, as prescribed for in the DMCA and the matter is taken care of.

Exactly. The DMCA is so clear and easy to use, that I am genuinely questioning the legal chops of these lawyers involved. It's a simple form that most savvy internet users and tech employees (and all Livejournal users circa 2001) are familiar with.

I haven't seen the photos, but that doesn't matter. If she ASSERTS that she is the copyright owner under the DMCA, then they must act accordingly or lose safe harbor. That's how the DMCA works. Period. An ISP(what the porn site qualifies as) is not a judge and cannot determine who does or does not own copyright for…

Lawrence's lawyers or the porn site's lawyers are 100% ignorant on this issue then. Her lawyer MUST submit a DMCA claim. That's the law. It is very simple, they must include all required facilities of the DMCA in the DMCA notification to the porn site. From there it's essentially prescriptive.

I dunno. It seems ok. He's the president of the US, not Andre Leon Talley. Jeeez.