MESSAGE
| DATE | 2026-05-07 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] amicus - complaint cleaned version...
|
On 5/7/26 8:09 PM, Aviva wrote:
> Well, if they accept Fair Use as a defense of Copyright, it will not
> have much of a significant impact.
It is not our business and I REALLY have other things I am dealing with.
I should had just written it myself
Something like this:
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF NEW YORKERS FOR FAIR USE
I. INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE
New Yorkers for Fair Use represents a coalition of citizens and digital
advocates who view the over-extension of copyright law as a direct
threat to civil liberties. Our interest lies in ensuring the judicial
system is not used as a tool for "legalized bullying" that strips
individuals of their First and Fourth Amendment protections.
II. ARGUMENT
1. Fair Use as a Constitutional Limit, Not a Litigation "Excuse."
The First Amendment does not permit the government—or private parties
acting through the courts—to silence critique. Fair Use is the mechanism
that prevents copyright from becoming a state-sanctioned gag order. By
dismissing this case, the Court vindicated the Defendant's inherent
right to participate in the digital public square.
2. The 4th Amendment and the "Seizure" of Digital Expression via Trolling.
The Fourth Amendment protects the right of the people to be secure in
their digital "effects." Copyright trolling transforms this protection
into a vulnerability.
Weaponizing the DMCA: Plaintiff’s tactics involve using the DMCA and
meritless litigation to effectuate the unreasonable seizure of content.
When a platform is forced to "take down" speech based on an objectively
unreasonable claim, it is a seizure of that speaker's digital property
and presence.
Abuse of Process: Trolling tactics seek to bypass the Fourth
Amendment’s requirement for "reasonableness" by using the threat of
massive statutory damages to coerce speakers into silence or settlement.
This is an end-run around the due process typically required to seize or
suppress private property.
3. Deterring the "Troll" Business Model through Fee-Shifting.
The Plaintiff’s strategy in this case mirrors the "copyright troll"
model: filing claims not to protect a commercial market for the work,
but to exploit the high cost of legal defense.
The Censorship Motive: Unlike legitimate creators, "trolls" use
copyright as a proxy for censorship, seeking to "scrub" the internet of
critical or embarrassing content.
Correcting the Power Imbalance: Awarding attorney fees is the only
way to break the trolling cycle. Without fee-shifting, the "seizure" of
a defendant's financial resources becomes a punishment in itself, even
if they eventually win. To protect the Fourth Amendment rights of the
citizenry, the Court must make the "seizure" of speech financially
ruinous for the aggressor, not the victim.
III. CONCLUSION
To prevent the judicial system from being used as a mechanism for
unreasonable digital seizures and the suppression of free speech, New
Yorkers for Fair Use respectfully requests that this Court GRANT the
motion for attorney fees.
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com
Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
