Originally Posted by Quentin

If Oron is compliant with the DMCA, that might well be true; the heart of Liberty Media's complaint, however, is the assertion that Oron simply does not comply with DMCA, and that it clearly did not comply with an important provision of the statute prior to July 2011.

From the complaint:



There is much more to complying with DMCA than simply honoring take down requests. As the bit from Liberty's complaint that I quoted above suggests, one of the other important facets of compliance is registering a designated DMCA agent with U.S. Copyright Office, and subsequently publishing contact information for that agent on your website(s).

Oron only registered its DMCA agent in July of last year, so with respect to any infringing activity at issue in Liberty's complaint that took place prior to that date of registration, the court may well find that Oron should not benefit from DMCA safe harbor with respect to such infringement.

Beyond that, there's nothing in the DMCA that protects you from contributory copyright infringement claims if you are willfully and knowingly profiting from infringement, even if the direct infringement itself is being perpetrated by third parties.

Which brings us to the following claims in Liberty's complaint:



If Liberty can provide evidence of those claims at trial, in combination with the lack of a registered agent for Oron prior to July of 2011, I'd say Liberty is in a pretty good position to come out on top in this case.