Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—N.D. Cal.: Artist’s $100M YouTube monopolization claim recommended for dismissal, (Dec 7, 2015)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

A musical artist failed to state a monopolization claim against YouTube, LLC for purportedly failing to comply with a takedown request for a music video performed by his band, according to a magistrate judge for the federal district court in San Jose. In recommending that the monopolization claim be dismissed without leave to amend, the magistrate judge determined that the artist failed to allege any facts defining a “relevant market” and that the deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment (Albert v. YouTube, LLC, December 4, 2015, Cousins, N.).

The musical artist claimed that YouTube failed to “even consider” a copyright infringement takedown notice he sent concerning a music video performed by his band, Marc Mysterio, for the song “Everything Is All Wrong.” He sent the alleged takedown request through YouTube’s system, but was denied the request because the music video was received under license from VEVO. The plaintiff alleged monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act, copyright infringement, and violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Because the artist was proceeding in forma pauperis, the court was required to preliminarily screen the complaint to ensure it stated a claim.

Monopolization. The court determined that the monopolization claim was inadequately alleged. In particular, the artist alleged that YouTube violated the Sherman Act by “creating a monopoly by and through aforementioned abusive practices.” The allegations, however, were devoid of any facts defining a “relevant market” for antitrust purposes, the court determined. Further, conclusory allegations that YouTube created a monopoly and references to heavy web traffic on YouTube did not remedy the deficiency. The magistrate judge therefore recommended that the monopolization claim be dismissed without leave to amend.

Copyright infringement, DMCA. In addition, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal of the copyright infringement claim due to failure to allege: (1) that showing the music video on YouTube violated the artist’s ownership rights; and (2) that VEVO does not have the power to license the content to YouTube for public consumption. Finally, the DMCA claim was also recommended for dismissal because the artist did not allege facts suggesting YouTube did not comply with the DMCA sufficient to qualify for a safe harbor under the statute, or that YouTube had an insufficient notification system for dealing with takedown requests.

The case is No. 15-cv-05283 NC.

Companies: YouTube, LLC

Cases: Antitrust CaliforniaNews