Copyright trolls are a nuisance to almost every industry and even individuals, and their activities are frequently banned because of the lucrative nature of their profession. While big tech companies are often accused of not taking enough action to combat this threat, some digital rights groups are actively fighting back against trolls.
One group at the forefront of this fight is the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court outlining the issue of copyright fraud. The filing is part of the Warner Chappell Music v. Neely case, which does not directly deal with the issue of copyright trolls but "concerns the interpretation of the statute of limitations in copyright cases."
The brief urges the court to limit the statute of limitations for copyright claims to a specific number of years from the time the infringement is alleged, rather than from the time the infringement is discovered, which may be unfair to defendants. U.S. copyright law clearly stipulates a three-year statute of limitations "after the claim arises," but plaintiff Nealy argued that the claim would not arise until he discovered the alleged infringement.
WarnerChappellMusic believes that the claim arose when the infringement occurred, so the plaintiff has three years to file the claim and seek compensation. According to the EFF, if the Supreme Court agrees with Nealy's interpretation of the statute of limitations, copyright giants could use the judicial system to sue for alleged infringement that may have occurred decades ago, creating significant risk and uncertainty for defendants.
EFF's amicus brief received support from several major industry groups, including the Recording Industry Association of America and the Association of American Publishers. Another notable proponent is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which also supports the concept of a statutory three-year statute of limitations for copyright claims. It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court interprets the law, but from a citizen's perspective, we hope a more pragmatic view will prevail.
EFF urges the Supreme Court to protect targets of copyright trolls, arguing that damages for copyright infringement can only be awarded for alleged infringements that occurred within three years before the complaint was filed. According to the group, "an indefinite statute of limitations would add fuel to the fire of patent trolls and potentially encourage new trolls to emerge from under the image bridge."