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

    After 16 years and $8 billion, the military’s new GPS software still doesn’t work

    “As a result, extensive and more operationally relevant testing with actual GPS satellites, ground antennas, and user equipment led to an increase in finding extensive system issues across all subsystems,…

    15% of Americans say they’d be willing to work for an AI boss, according to new poll

    Would you trade your manager for a chatbot? A growing number of Americans are saying yes. According to a Quinnipiac University poll published Monday, 15% of Americans say they’d be…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.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

    You Missed

    Test Match Special Podcast – Edwards: England’s fitness issues have been put to bed

    Test Match Special Podcast – Edwards: England’s fitness issues have been put to bed

    42 Spring Beauty and Fashion Items on an Editor’s Wish List

    42 Spring Beauty and Fashion Items on an Editor’s Wish List

    Airport cleared to be renamed for Trump as he unveils design for skyscraper library

    Airport cleared to be renamed for Trump as he unveils design for skyscraper library

    American Hotel Income Properties REIT LP Reports Q4 2025 Results, Improved Balance Sheet and Demonstrated Hotel Value

    White House defends praying for U.S. troops after pope suggests they won’t be heard

    Scientists discover sleep switch that builds muscle, burns fat, and boosts brainpower

    Scientists discover sleep switch that builds muscle, burns fat, and boosts brainpower