The days of whispering on the phone and the “no-tell motel” seem to be over. The internet has taken over the job of connecting people who wish to cheat on their spouses. But, as with all things secret, sometimes they get found out. On June 19, 2015, news broke that the online service for cheating spouses, Ashley Madison, had been hacked. What’s worse, the hackers threatened to expose the names and addresses of the reported 37 million users of the site. Ashley Madison sent out DMCA takedown notices to plug the leaks. But did Ashley Madison have the legal right to send them out? Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., takes a look at what the Supreme Court has said about claiming copyright in a collection of facts, and it doesn’t look good for the cheaters.

Last month saw Courts in Canada, Germany and the USA all order web service companies to take affirmative steps to block access to pirated material. In at least two cases, the web services provided material assistance even after being served with injunctions and Court orders. Has the tide finally turned for the court system to get tough with those web services that actively assist copyright infringement? Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., provides an in depth guide to these decisions, and shows that those who cry wolf over such decisions are really just howling in the night.

If you are looking for pirated copies of the latest Hollywood blockbusters, look no further than Chilling Effects, a database operated by Harvard University and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. While claiming to be a “research database,” what it actually does is provide a handy tool for finding pirated material on the internet, complete with a search function that will provide the exact pirate URL that you can copy and paste into your browser. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., shows you how Chilling Effects operates in brazen defiance of the copyright laws including their dubious claim to DMCA safe harbor.

Monday, May 18, 2015 saw the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversing itself in the closely watched case of Garcia v. Google. The earlier decision caused a lot of consternation around the copyright world, especially in Hollywood. The previous three judge panel ruled, for the first time, that an actor had a copyright in her individual performance in a motion picture. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., takes an in depth look at the legal controversy over the film Innocence of Muslims, and what this decision means for Hollywood and copyright in the future.

Pirate streaming site Grooveshark closed its operations last week rather than face the prospect that its founders would be personally liable for potentially $736 million dollars in damages. Two separate courts had issued summary judgements against them, with one Court noting that Grooveshark had sent out over 36 million music streams without payment or license. How did they stay in business for nearly 10 years? By hiding behind the DMCA safe harbor provisions, of course. Nova Southeastern University's Copyright Officer, Stephen Carlisle, J.D., takes you through the facts and findings of the two judgements and suggests how future Groovesharks can be prevented.