Authors’ lucky break in court may help class action over Meta torrenting



Because Meta was going to face the contributory infringement claim anyway, it would not prejudice Meta to require discovery on the issue so late in the class action, Chhabria wrote.

Further, “denying the motion to add the contributory infringement claim could potentially harm the interests of the proposed class members,” Chhabria said. If the class action proceeded without the claim, members would be barred from ever raising it, even if the Entrepreneur Media case ruling went against Meta, the judge noted.

“There is a serious concern that the interests of the absent class members would be harmed, through no fault of their own,” Chhabria wrote, while noting that he granted the authors’ request “reluctantly.”

“On the flip side,” Chhabria said, adding the claim to the class action basically “meant that if the named plaintiffs obtained summary judgment and subsequently obtained class certification, proposed class members would know, when deciding whether to opt out of the class, that they had essentially already won.”

Chhabria’s ruling perhaps incentivizes Meta to dodge these claims as fast as possible. He noted that Meta faces no discovery in the class action “until plaintiffs can get past summary judgment on the distribution and contributory infringement claims.”

Moving forward, authors may feel somewhat more optimistic that they could get a partial win. Chhabria explained the standard for contributory infringement as a lower bar, proving that Meta was “facilitating copyright infringement by third parties by uploading protected works onto the torrenting network.”

Yet the authors can’t be sure, since looming on the horizon, Meta is drafting a filing based on the Supreme Court ruling that could change the game.

Already, Meta is seemingly willing to make any argument to escape consequences for torrenting. It’s continuing to argue that the number of works at dispute is a small fraction of the total data that was torrented. And it has even claimed that there’s no way to prove that Meta ever knew that torrenting required uploading.

However, if Meta loses at the summary judgment stage, the authors are ready to argue that none of Meta’s internal discussions of torrenting should be privileged. If that discovery request is eventually granted, it could finally expose who exactly at Meta approved the torrenting and how well did they understand how BitTorrent works.



Source link

  • Related Posts

    Samsung Faces Strike From Nearly 48,000 Union Workers

    They had failed to reach an agreement regarding worker bonuses. Geliodor/Shutterstock Nearly 48,000 Samsung workers in South Korea, which make up 38 percent of the company’s workforce in…

    Tech Editors Talk Generative AI Announcements at Google I/O 2026

    Tech Editors Talk Generative AI Announcements at Google I/O 2026 CNET Editor at Large Andrew Lanxon hosts a panel discussion about the latest generative AI demos we saw at Google…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    Chiesi Group Announces New Chair and Vice Chair

    Lithuania lifts air alert after suspected drones approaching from Belarus diverted – Europe live | Europe

    Lithuania lifts air alert after suspected drones approaching from Belarus diverted – Europe live | Europe

    Embracer Gives Saints Row and Deus Ex Fans Hope of a Franchise Revival

    Embracer Gives Saints Row and Deus Ex Fans Hope of a Franchise Revival

    Schools evacuated as magnitude 5.6 quake hits eastern Turkey

    Schools evacuated as magnitude 5.6 quake hits eastern Turkey

    Samsung Faces Strike From Nearly 48,000 Union Workers

    Samsung Faces Strike From Nearly 48,000 Union Workers

    Why The Airbus A350 Has Such A High Service Ceiling

    Why The Airbus A350 Has Such A High Service Ceiling