Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 1, 2025

Lynk Media LLC v. Townsquare Media, Inc.

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:24-cv-04222
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
10
Intellectual PropertyMotion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Lynk Media v. Townsquare Media, Judge Roman granted Townsquare’s motion as to the screenshot but denied it as to the embedded video.

Who this affects

Lynk Media LLC’s copyright claim concerning the screenshot was dismissed through the granted portion of Townsquare Media, Inc.’s motion, while the claim concerning Townsquare’s embedded use of the video continues.

What happened

Lynk Media LLC sued Townsquare Media, Inc. for copyright infringement, alleging that Townsquare’s website embedded Lynk’s video of a Holland Tunnel protest and used a screenshot from the video in a news article. Townsquare asked the court to dismiss the claims under the federal rule governing failure to state a claim.

Townsquare argued that X’s terms allowed it to embed the video, and that using one screenshot was too minor to support infringement or was fair use. The court said the licensing defense was premature because the relevant X agreements did not clearly establish a sublicense for Townsquare at this stage. But it concluded that using one frame from the ten-minute, twenty-two-second video was too trivial to be actionable.

Judge Nelson S. Roman granted Townsquare’s motion in part as to the screenshot and denied it as to the video. The court did not decide Townsquare’s fair-use argument and directed Townsquare to answer the amended complaint by December 22, 2025.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Lynk Media LLC v. Townsquare Media, Inc. · No. 7:24-cv-04222
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Dec. 1, 2025

Background

Lynk Media LLC brought a copyright-infringement action under 17 U.S.C. § 501 against Townsquare Media, Inc. Lynk alleged that Townsquare infringed its copyright in a video showing pro-Palestinian protesters stopping traffic at the Holland Tunnel. According to the amended complaint, Townsquare published a news article on its website that both embedded the video and used a screenshot from the video as the article’s cover image. The screenshot included a “FreedomNews.tv” logo.

Townsquare moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not plausibly state a legal claim.

The Embedded Video

Townsquare argued that X’s Terms of Service and Developer Agreement gave it a sublicense to display the video through X’s embedding functionality. The court examined the versions of those documents in effect on January 8, 2024, when the alleged infringement occurred.

The court found that the licensing argument could not resolve the video claim at the motion-to-dismiss stage. Courts had found the relevant X language ambiguous or insufficiently clear to establish a sublicense for embedding, and the authenticity and applicability of the Developer Agreement could be addressed through fact discovery. The court therefore denied the motion to dismiss with respect to Townsquare’s use of the video.

The Screenshot

Townsquare also argued that the screenshot was de minimis, meaning so minor that it could not support a copyright claim, and that the use was fair use. The court held that a single still frame from a ten-minute-and-twenty-two-second video was quantitatively trivial and therefore de minimis. It distinguished a case in which a screenshot captured a distinctive moment and was the only image used to illustrate an article, noting that Townsquare’s article also included another embedded video and that the screenshot was not displayed throughout the website.

Because it found the screenshot use de minimis, the court did not decide Townsquare’s separate fair-use argument.

Disposition

Judge Nelson S. Roman granted Townsquare Media, Inc.’s motion to dismiss in part with respect to Townsquare’s use of the screenshot and denied the motion with respect to Townsquare’s use of the video. The court directed Townsquare to answer Lynk’s amended complaint by December 22, 2025.

Classification Note

This is classified as a procedural order because the ruling was issued on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, even though the court resolved the screenshot issue and allowed the embedded-video claim to proceed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.