Title is somewhat misleading. It’s not for anything video-related. It’s for using a (probably free) photo of actress Cuca Escribano without permission.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 year ago

    The same photo is still in use by The Movie DB, one of Plex’s data suppliers.

    So someone submitted a copyrighted image to a 3rd-party user-created database and Plex ingested the image.

    Seems like the claimant has a legitimate case but it’s strange that they didn’t sue the people actually providing the image. Not enough money in it, probably.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s also odd that they wouldn’t start with a simple takedown notice or Cease & Desist notice. Courts don’t tend to look kindly upon frivolous lawsuits when it’s clear that the filing party didn’t try to resolve things out of court first. Because it ties up the system when courts could be focused on bigger or more complicated issues. Judges don’t appreciate feeling like their time is being wasted.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well it sounds like they took it down immediately so it was “resolved” but I guess that doesn’t undo the lost revenue.

        • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          From what I know, if they complied immediately, the plaintiff doesn’t really have a case

  • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most people use the service for perfectly legitimate purposes. On the fringes, however, some users abuse the software to share pirate libraries publicly, a considerable thorn in the side for rightsholders.

    I’ve been using it for over a decade and I don’t know single person that uses it for “perfectly legitimate purposes” (assuming they mean "not for pirated content, considering the next sentence). There’s no reason to use Plex as a front end for all other streaming services.

    • Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah it doesn’t matter your experience. You need to accept everyone is innocent unless you can prove it. So… To bad

      • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You need to accept everyone is innocent unless you can prove it. So… To bad

        What? I’m not a lawyer out to get people, I’m just saying that the majority of their userbase is most likely playing pirated material.

        • Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And I’m saying you can’t prove that, so it doesn’t matter. It’s just a guess. A good one in my opinion, but nothing else.

  • brax@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wow, how does any of this make sense? Plex doesn’t host the image… seems like another case of corporate execs having no fucking clue about anything. 5/7 gg

    • crawley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I thought the whole point of these things is to sue them so you can get it front of a judge who might say it is in fact legally Plex’s responsibility, so the whole thing becomes Plex’s legal responsibility, and they can either crack down massively internally or get sued into oblivion by others, and they didn’t have to go through the whole big rigamarole of suing each individual person.

  • Morgikan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whether they win the case or not, Plex should replace the photo with one poorly drawn in MS Paint as an FU to the photographer.

  • matey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most people use the service for perfectly legitimate purposes.

    But also, the copyright infringement is for using a picture of an actress on their website; the photographer who took the photo usually licenses it for third party use, and Plex didn’t have permission to use it.