Center for Copyright Information Independent Review Process Diana N Didia ODR 2015 Pace Law School June 5 2015 First some background 2 Education instead of litigation 3 AAA involvement started with a WSJ article ID: 569256
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "1 ODR CASE STUDY" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
1
ODR CASE STUDY
Center for Copyright Information - Independent Review Process
Diana N. Didia
ODR 2015 | Pace Law School June 5, 2015Slide2
First, some background …
2Slide3
Education instead of litigation …
3Slide4
AAA involvement started with a WSJ article …
4Slide5
CCI Copyright Alert System (CAS)Copyright owners send notices of alleged infringement to participating ISPs, who then forward these notices to their Subscribers in the form of Copyright Alerts. The Alerts, include the date, time, time zone and title of the copyrighted content alleged to have been unlawfully distributed or shared.
Users sent a maximum of six Alerts, including appropriate grace periods, with an increasing degree of seriousness.
The opportunity to ask for a independent review (appeal) begins at the “Mitigation Alert” phase (after three or four Alerts, depending on the Subscriber’s ISP).
5Slide6
Copyright Alert SystemSlide7
CAS - Independent Review ProgramSubscriber redirected to AAA web properties to initiate review; details regarding Copyright Alerts pre-populated.Independent Review Program is limited solely to determining the validity of the Copyright Alert.
The review process is most similar to expedited, documents only Arbitration.
Subscriber information is kept confidential from Content Owners unless “Authorization” is asserted by the SubscriberDecisions due in as little as 21 days from filing unless additional info is requested or an extension granted by the Independent Reviewer. No case longer than 60 days.
7Slide8
Grounds for challenging a Copyright Alert …
8
Misidentification of AccountSubscriber’s ISP account has been incorrectly identified as a source of copyright infringementUnauthorized Use of AccountAlleged activity was the result of the unauthorized use of the Subscriber’s account. May only be used once.
AuthorizationUse of the copyrighted work was authorized by its copyright owner.Fair UseSubscriber’s reproduction and distribution of the copyrighted work constituted “Fair Use” of the work (according to the legal definition).Misidentification of File
File in question did not consist primarily of the alleged copyrighted work at issue but rather contained other non-infringing material.Pre-1923 DefenseAlleged copyrighted work was published prior to 1923 and therefore is not protected under U.S. Copyright lawSlide9
Independent Review ProceduresThere is a $35 filing fee; hardship waiver availablePanel consists of 18 AAA Arbitrators; disclosures already made as to Content Owners and ISPs; assigned round-robin.
Reviewer
receives appointment to serve via email; accesses Electronic Case File in the AAA’s Neutrals’ eCenterDetermine if “Unauthorized Use of Account” (if asserted) is barred
Assess the case file for completeness within 7 days; Subscriber has 7 additional days to perfect the filing or case is Dismissed With Prejudice
9Slide10
Independent Review Procedures (cont’d)Can review Notice/s that triggered Alert/s and may also review Evidence Package at Mark Monitor siteMay request Supplemental Information
; Content Owner, ISP, or Subscriber has 14 days to provide; for “Authorization
” or “Fair Use” the Content Owner has an additional 14 days to rebutReviewer may grant only one 14 day (max.) extensionRender a Decision within 14 days
; Subscriber prevails if successfully defending at least half of the Alerts; Decision Template in AAA Neutrals’ eCenterIf Subscriber’s prevails, no Mitigation Measure applied, all previous Alerts cleared; $35 filing fee refunded.
10Slide11
The technical implementation…11Challenges:Significant tension between participating organizationsFront end (Copyright Alerts) planned and being built before Independent Review process was finalized.Subscriber anonymousISP’s insisted on high-level of automation to avoid service level impacts
Interfacing with IT networks of multiple organizations
Lawyers as business ownersUnrealistic/uniformed deadlinesSecurity, security, security …Slide12
Information Flow12Slide13
Technology HighlightsAll evidence submission, document review and party communications completed on-line.All communications between AAA and ISPs automated via standard Web Services.Filing confirmations, notice to serve and notice of “draft” decision to AAA
sent via automated emails.Subscriber
CC processing done via Authorize.net iFrame to further protect anonymity.IR compensation automatically paid based on step completion; AAA fees automatically collected via CCI draw down account
Only supplemental information requests and final decision review and distribution handled via AAA Case Manager off-line interaction; non-automated communications done via email.13Slide14
What the subscriber sees…14Slide15
Entering their defense …15Slide16
IR Decision Template …16Slide17
Decision email …17Slide18
The stats ….18Slide19
Defenses …19Slide20
Outcomes …20Subscriber Prevailed on 30% of Alerts/Filings