White v. UMG Recordings, Inc.

Background

Jordan White sued UMG Recordings, Inc., Jordan Timothy Jenks, Jordan Carter, and Does 1–10 under § 512(f) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. That provision can impose liability when someone knowingly makes a material misrepresentation that content is infringing, causing an online service provider to remove or disable access to it.

White alleged that he bought rights from Jenks to use a musical instrumental arrangement called the “Beat.” With Jenks’s knowledge, White used the Beat in a song called “Oi!” and distributed the song online. Carter later released a song called “Right Now” that also used the Beat. White alleged that one or more defendants sent copyright takedown notices to Twitter, causing Twitter to remove posts and videos related to “Oi!”. White said he then could not promote, monetize, or otherwise enjoy the benefits of his work.

The moving defendants—Jenks, Carter, and UMG—asked the court to dismiss White’s amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not adequately state a legal claim. At this stage, the court treated the complaint’s well-pleaded factual allegations as true and considered whether they plausibly showed that the defendants knowingly made material misrepresentations, Twitter relied on them by removing White’s posts, and White suffered damages.

Ruling as to Jenks

The court denied the motion to dismiss White’s claim against Jenks. White alleged that Jenks sold him the rights to use the Beat, knew that White used it in “Oi!”, and was connected to the takedown notices concerning “Oi!”. Taken together, those allegations allowed the court to infer that Jenks knew White’s Twitter posts were not infringing a copyright Jenks might have owned.

The court also held that White did not need to identify with certainty which defendant sent the notices at the pleading stage. The allegation that “one or more” defendants sent them could be treated as pleading alternative theories. The court further found it plausible that White’s inability to post about “Oi!” deprived him of an opportunity to promote his music and could have caused damages.

Ruling as to Carter

The court granted the motion to dismiss White’s claim against Carter. White alleged that Carter obtained the Beat from Jenks, used it in “Right Now,” and may have benefited from preventing distribution of “Oi!”. White also alleged that a member of Carter’s musical group had allowed “Oi!” to appear on that person’s SoundCloud page.

The court held that these allegations did not support a reasonable inference that Carter knew White had the right to post about “Oi!” or that Carter coordinated with Jenks to send false takedown notices. White’s general statements about the defendants’ relationships and alleged knowledge were conclusory and insufficient.

Ruling as to UMG

The court granted the motion to dismiss White’s claim against UMG. Apart from conclusory statements, the amended complaint did not allege facts about UMG’s relationship with the other defendants or what UMG knew about White’s right to publish content related to “Oi!”.

Further amendment and disposition

The defendants asked the court to dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice, meaning that White would be barred from bringing the dismissed claims again through another amendment. The court denied that request because it was not convinced that White could not correct the pleading deficiencies. White could file a motion for leave to amend within 21 days of the order.

The court’s final disposition was that the motion to dismiss was granted as to White’s claims against Carter and UMG and denied as to his claim against Jenks. The order addressed whether the complaint adequately stated claims; it did not decide whether any defendant ultimately violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.