Graydon Head

Blog: Jack "Out of the Box"

Welcome to Jack "Out of the Box." This is a spin-off of the Firm's InfoLaw Newsletter, much like "CSI: Miami" is a spin-off from "CSI." Except without all the corpses. I plan to update the blog at least weekly. Really. It's not like when I used to promise my mom to clean my room once a week. I'm more mature now. And of course, the InfoLaw Newsletter will continue every two weeks. The blog will feature shorter pieces, and ideally, reader feedback. Should be fun. Oh yeah, and informative.

Cute Kid / Ugly Court Fight

Oct 14, 2013

How could this incredibly cute YouTube video land a family in court? When it becomes the subject of a copyright battle. For those hard hearted souls who did not click on the link, the video shows a baby boy sitting in the bathtub splashing the pet dachshund, who keeps sticking its nose over the edge of the tub. The baby boy laughs heartily the entire time. It is adorable. And I don’t use that word very easily, if ever.

Ashley Candler, the boy’s mom, apparently shot the video and uploaded it to YouTube. And not long after that, the laughter stopped. It seems that a woman named Shannon Carter uploaded the video to a separate YouTube channel, claiming not only that she owned the copyright, but that she was the baby’s aunt. Her channel is supported by advertising, which means she makes some money every time someone views it. To date, the video on Carter’s YouTube channel has been viewed nearly 70 million times. 

Candler filed a lawsuit in a California federal court claiming that Carter infringed Candler’s copyright in the video. According to the complaint, Candler notified YouTube about the alleged infringement, and the video came down temporarily. But Carter apparently provided a counter notice, stating under penalty of perjury that she owned the copyright. 

According to Candler, though, there is no way that Carter could have possibly believed she owned the copyright, since she was not the one who shot the video.

Interesting case. If Candler is telling the truth, it sounds like Carter is a compulsive liar. But the case illustrates an important point that bears repeating. A person doesn’t lose copyright protection by posting a video to YouTube. While YouTube gets a license in the video, no one else does. And while it may seem a little counter intuitive that a person can make a video freely available to the world, but still be able to sue someone for re-posting it, that is the law. And if the unauthorized user makes money off of the content, it makes the copyright owner’s case that much stronger.



Connect on Facebook

Get Linkedin with Jack

Follow Me

Federal Trade Commission
Rebecca Tushnet's 43 (B)log
Pittsburgh Trademark Lawyer

Do You Know Jack?

(what's the point of a blog without them)
We'd love to hear what you're thinking. Although we can't guarantee that we'll post every question or comment on our site, please note that when you submit a question or comment we assume we've got your consent to post it on our site. To add a comment on any post, just click on "go comment" immediately below that post.

(you had to see this coming):
This blog is a periodic publication of Graydon Head & Ritchey LLP and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only, and you are urged to consult your own advisor concerning your situation and any specific legal question you may have. Many states, including Kentucky, require that law firms add the statement "THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT" on publications of this nature.

Copyright © 2016 Graydon Head & Ritchey LLP. All Rights Reserved.