Communications Litigation Today was a Warren News publication.

Photographer Alleges Amazon Allowed 'Fake Accounts' to Infringe His Work

Amazon breached its duty to a confidential settlement agreement it reached with photographer Barry Rosen regarding future copyright infringement, alleged Rosen's copyright complaint Monday (docket 2:24-cv-00771) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. The settlement agreement outlined Rosen’s and Amazon’s responsibilities in “Specialized Notice and Takedown Procedure Prior to Filing Suit,” said the complaint. Rosen followed the procedure “to the best of his ability,” but Amazon failed to abide by its responsibilities, it said. The Los Angeles resident has never licensed Amazon to use his photographs for any purpose, nor has he granted any entity or individual rights to sell physical or digital copies of the photographs in question on Amazon websites, it said. Amazon “intentionally allowed, provided material assistance, or otherwise induced sellers” to post infringing copies of Rosen's copyrighted works on its e-commerce platform to “advertise, market and promote business activities, and/or to sell infringing products predominantly consisting of posters for profit,” the complaint said. Though Rosen notified Amazon of the infringing activities of its users through a series of Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices, Amazon “failed to remove infringements” from its websites or servers and failed to terminate users, where appropriate, “despite red-flag knowledge of repeated or ongoing infringing activities,” it said. Among the seller accounts using Rosen’s photographs were JP The Brick, FC Carino, Warm Keepers, Posh LJ, Shine On and Geary Stop, the complaint said. Many of the accounts were “repeat infringers” with “dozens of infringements.” Amazon “failed to terminate the user accounts or to maintain a proper DMCA termination policy,” it said. Amazon should have had reason to know that the sellers of infringing posters reported by Rosen were “fake accounts and/or directly related to two separate identifiable infringers located in California who are likely either all the same people or are otherwise working together,” it said.