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
    33
    ·
    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.

  • brax@sh.itjust.works
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    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
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      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.

  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Lmao, did they start with a C&D or just go straight to court?

    It was ingested automatically from a public source; if you didn’t even bother to inform them of the infringement, the case should be thrown out for that alone. There’s no intent here, it’s just incidental.

    What a waste of time, energy, and money, for all involved…

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

      Wasting the time, energy, and money of Plex is the goal though. Do it enough times and the business folds.

  • Morgikan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    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
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    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.

    • hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      But also, the copyright infringement is for injesting automatically from a third party a picture of an actress on their website

      FTFY