| Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry | |
|---|---|
| Court | United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division |
| Full case name | Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., Jerald Tanner, Sandra Tanner, et al., U.S. District Court, Utah, Case No. 2:99-CV-808C.[1] |
| Date decided | November 30, 2000[2] |
| Judge(s) sitting | Tena Campbell, United States District Judge.[3] |
Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry was a United States district court decision (1999) on the subject of deep linking and contributory infringement of copyright.
Contents |
The plaintiff, Intellectual Reserve, Inc., is a Salt Lake City, Utah based corporation which owns the copyright and has the rights to other intellectual property assets used by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church, better known by the 'Mormons'). The defendants, Utah Lighthouse Ministries, Inc., operate a web site which publishes material which is critical of the LDS Church.[1]
The LDS Church had printed a work of text called the Church Handbook of Instructions: Book 1, Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics. This work had not been published, and had been prepared only for use within the church. The defendants had obtained a copy of the work and published parts of it on their website without reproducing the Intellectual Reserve, Inc. copyright notice. The copyrighted text had also been disseminated to other websites who had published the material, to which the defendants' website linked.[1]
The plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction and argued that:
The plaintiffs also argued that
The court originally granted a preliminary injunction for the plaintiff and the defendant was ordered to remove the material which allegedly was a copyright infringement from the website and to refrain from reproducing or distributing verbatim in a tangible medium any material which allegedly was a copyright infringement.[3]
The court then issued a permanent injunction, which "dissolved and vacated" the preliminary injunction.[2]
The defendants did not raise the issue of the doctrine of fair use in their defense.[1] The case did not affect situations where the material being linked to is posted by the copyright holder or with the permission of the copyright holder.[4] This case did not raise the issue of transitivity, i.e. it is irrelevant, whether the site which is being linked to contains any other questionable publications or links not related directly to the referenced material. If the transitivity was assured, virtually not a single website would be eligible for linking, as the copyright infringement can occur in user comments or user links. The preliminary finding was, as long as a link leads to a material legally published, the link should be considered valid.
The permanent injunction "dissolved and vacated" any case law created by the preliminary injunction.[2]
|