Renewed eruptions from a remote Indonesian volcano have triggered fresh evacuation orders and sparked flight cancellations and airport closures this week with smoke, lava and volcanic gasses spewing out of the fiery mountain.

Mount Ruang: Indonesia volcano eruptions force thousands to evacuate as airlines cancel flights | CNN

Arab News - Saudi Arabia based leading English newspaper in the Middle East. Keep up with the latest breaking news, regional news, politics, and business news.

Indonesia to permanently relocate 10000 people after Ruang volcano eruptions

HAWAIʻI VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK - Elevated seismicity continues beneath the upper East Rift Zone, as does the inflation in the caldera south of Halemaʻumaʻu that began on April 27th.

Kīlauea Volcano Update for Friday, May 3

Since midnight of April 27, over 1,600 earthquake events have been recorded on Kīlauea on the Big Island.

Volcano Watch: More than 1,600 earthquakes recorded on Kīlauea since late April | Big Island Now

An official website of the United States government · Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States

May 2, 2024—Summary map of recent unrest at Kīlauea volcano | U.S. Geological Survey

After Indonesia’s Mount Ruang volcano erupted, it triggered volcanic lightning, creating a Mordor-like sky. Andrew Chang explains the science behind the lightning and why the eruption is now also sparking fears of a tsunami.

Indonesia eruption: Why this volcano shoots lightning | About That | CBC.ca

Indonesia volcano eruptions force thousands to evacuate as airlines cancel 
flights

The volcano has casually been emitting gold into the atmosphere for decades, scientists say.

Metallic rain: Volcano spews thousands of dollars worth of gold daily - The Weather Network

JAKARTA - The Indonesian government will permanently relocate almost 10,000 residents after a series of explosive eruptions of the Ruang volcano has raised concerns about the dangers of residing on the island in future, a minister said on Friday.

Bangkok Post - Volcano to permanently displace 10,000 people

The Ruang volcano in Indonesia has erupted again, hurling a column of ash and rock into the sky. Thousands of residents are having to be evacuated to safety. There are also warnings of tsunamis.

Thousands flee volcanic eruption in Indonesia

Volcaino - The global B2B Intelligence tool. 

Volcaino

The wait is over! - it’s time to celebrate the champion startups of the world. Shout out to all of the participants in our ! You did a wonderful job showcasing your incredible startups and powering through another year. 2023 Startups of the Year is a community-driven voting platform brought to you by HackerNoon that recognizes and celebrates tech startups changing technology and the world for the better. The award started on May 8th, 2023, where the internet nominated and voted for 30k startups around the world. The voting period remained open until December 31, 2023, and now we are here with the winner announcement after a comprehensive evaluation by the HackerNoon team. Startups of the Year 2023 To see the top 3 startups in each respective city, visit and pick a city. hackernoon.com/startups You’ll get a little surprise 😉 Here are the Startups of the Year Regional Announcements: North America Europe Asia Africa South America Oceania Misc/Remote From all of us at HackerNoon, thank YOU for your excellent campaign perseverance 🥺 This year has been awesome! Startups of the Year 2023 is concluded with 623k+ total votes, up from 215k+ votes in the inaugural startup competition. We look forward to seeing you again in the next campaign (stay tuned 😉)! Without further ado, let us kick off the announcement by celebrating the cities with top votes per region for 2023 🎉 North America (11,697 votes): Winner: Bloomfilter Cleveland, Ohio (8,835 votes) - Winner: SerpApi Austin, Texas , California (5,564 votes) - Winner: Finch San Francisco (4,258 votes) - Winner: RELAYTO SoMa, California - (3339 votes) Winner: Windscribe Toronto, Canada, North America (3304 votes) - Winner: Vouched Seattle (2716 votes) - Winner: Seccuri Palo Alto, CA, North America (2671 votes) - Winner: Salsa Valley Miami, FL, North America (2,613 votes) - Winner: Majhi Group Manhattan, New York (2423 votes) - Winner: Flieber, Inc. New York City, NY, North America See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, North America, here Europe (45,612 votes) - Winner: Algomo London, UK (2,344votes) - Winner: Data Lake Warsaw, Poland (1,955 votes) - Winner: Hoken Tech Bari, Italy (1716 votes) - Winner: Not8 Amsterdam, Netherlands (1657 votes) - Winner: KYVE Frankfurt Am Main, Germany (1566 votes) - Winner: BazaIT Kyiv, Ukraine (1496 votes) - Winner:  Unity Network Tallinn, Estonia (1,478 votes) - Winner: Volcaino Ghent, Belgium (1,288 votes) - Winner: Owl Me Dublin, Ireland (1198 votes) - Winner: Groover Paris, France See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Europe, here Oceania (3,350 votes) - Winner: Sharepass Melbourne (2,107 votes) - Winner: The Catfisher Project Perth, Australia (220 votes) - Winner: Gemini AI Solutions Auckland, New Zealand, Oceania (213 votes) - Winner: Nexustorage Wellington, New Zealand, Oceania (138 votes) - Winner: Coviu Sydney (124 votes) - Winner: Bopple Brisbane, Australia, Oceania (124 votes) - Winner: Regional CFO New South Wales, Australia, Oceania (106 votes) - Winner: Edit on the Spot Gold Coast, Australia, Oceania (93 votes) - Winner: Knowledge Satnav Canbera, Australia, Oceania , Australia, Oceania (48 votes) - Winner: Peptalk360 North Melbourne, Melbourne See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Oceania, here Asia (16,345 votes) - Winner: Serenity Shield Singapore (13,588 votes) - Winners: QUIXY Telangana, India (10,168 votes) - Winner: HealthySure Mumbai, India (3,865 votes) - Winner: InterviewBuddy Visakhapatnam, India (3,733 votes) - Winner: Omniflo Bengaluru, India (4589 votes) - Winner: MeNow Tel Aviv (3877 votes) - Winner: ForestVPN Dubai (2478 votes) - Winner: TechGraph Powai, Mumbai, India (1004 votes) - Winner: Reelo Ahmedabad, GJ, India (875 votes) - Winner: Debt Hunter Hong Kong, China See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Asia, here Africa (8,179 votes) - Winner: GO PLATFORM Algiers, Algeria (767 votes) - Winner: Tudu Accra, Ghana (415 votes) - Winner: Treford Lagos, Nigeria (265 votes) - Winner: Phalconwise Ogbomosho, Nigeria (157 votes) - Winner: AbuErdan Cairo (151 votes) - Winner: Eazipay Lekki (144 votes) - Winner: KaziConnect Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (101 votes) - Winner: faceATT Gauteng, South Africa (79 votes) - Winner: Dimagi Cape Town (71 votes) - Winner: Sabi Addis Ababa See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, Africa, here South America (376 votes ) - Winner: UpGirl Santiago, Chile (217 votes) - Winner: Klever Sao Paulo, Brazil (191 votes) - Winner: Tributo Simple Buenos Aires, Argentina (127 votes) - Winner: Light-it Montevideo, Uruguay (87 votes) -Winner: Thousand Antioquia, Colombia (108 votes) - Winner: GetLavado Lima (101 votes) - Winner: Cogniflow Medellin (73 votes) - Winner: TPAGA Bogota (73 votes) - Winner: Reliv Quito (47 votes) - WInner: Quantex Cordoba See the complete announcement for the . Startups of the Year, South America, here Misc/Remote: Featured Startups (1500 votes) - Winner: CIC Chain Remote, Earth (1193 votes) - Winner: Reship Colony US Misc (146 Votes) - Winner: Partful UK, Misc (116 votes) - Winner: GoMining British Virgin Islands Misc (283 Votes) - Winner: tomorrowSpace Germany Misc (225 votes) - Winner: Dtravel Cayman Islands See the complete announcement for Misc/Remote startups . here Once again, HUGE CONGRATULATIONS and BIG PROPS to all of the top Startups of each region this year! The whole team at HackerNoon would like to thank you for your perseverance in the campaign, and we look forward to seeing you in the next campaign. About HackerNoon’s Startups Of The Year Startups of The Year is HackerNoon’s Flagship community-driven event celebrating startups that survived and thrived in 2023. 30,000 startups across 4200+ cities and six continents participated this year to be crowned the best startup in their city. Visit our page to learn more. FAQ Companies that blog more get 67% more leads - Jumpstart your company’s blogging journey by purchasing our . Business Blogging Package The 2023 Startups Of The Year is sponsored by: . . The winners get a free .Tech Domain, a HackerNoon NFT, and a Tech Company News Page. TECH Domains

Stand Up for the Champion Startups of the Year! 

বছরের চ্যাম্পিয়ন স্টার্টআপের জন্য দাঁড়ান!

Setzen Sie sich für die Champion-Startups des Jahres ein!

¡Defiende a las startups campeonas del año!

Défendez les startups championnes de l’année !

वर्ष के चैंपियन स्टार्टअप के लिए खड़े रहें!

今年のチャンピオンスタートアップのために立ち上がろう!

올해의 챔피언 스타트업을 위해 일어서세요!

Defenda as startups campeãs do ano!

Встаньте на защиту стартапов-чемпионов года!

Yılın Şampiyon Startup'ları için Ayağa Kalkın!

Hãy ủng hộ các công ty khởi nghiệp vô địch của năm!

为年度冠军初创企业挺身而出！

The Story-book of Science by Jean-Henri Fabre, is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . CATANIA CHAPTER XLVI. CATANIA “YESTERDAY,” Uncle Paul resumed, “Jules asked me if the lava-streams could not reach towns situated near volcanoes. The following story will answer his question. It is about an eruption of Mount Etna.” “Etna is that volcano in Sicily where the big chestnut tree of a hundred horses is?” asked Claire. “Yes. I must tell you that two hundred years ago there occurred in Sicily one of the most terrible eruptions on record. During the night, after a furious storm, the earth began to tremble so violently that a great many houses fell. Trees swayed like reeds shaken by the wind; people, fleeing distracted into the country to avoid being crushed under the ruins of their buildings, lost their footing on the quaking ground, stumbled, and fell. At that moment Etna burst in a fissure four leagues long, and along this fissure rose a number of volcanic mouths, vomiting, amid the crash of frightful detonations, clouds of black smoke and calcined sand. Soon seven of these mouths united in an abyss that for four months did not cease thundering, glowing, and throwing up cinders and lava. The crater of Etna, at first quite at rest, as if its furnaces had no connection with the new volcanic mouths, woke up a few days after and threw to a prodigious height a column of flames and smoke; then the whole mountain shook, and all the crests that dominated its crater fell into the depths of the volcano. The next day four mountaineers dared to climb to the top of Etna. They found the crater very much enlarged by the falling-in of the day before: its orifice, which before had measured one league, now measured two. “In the meantime, torrents of lava were pouring from all the crevasses of the mountain down upon the plain, destroying houses, forests, and crops. Some leagues from the volcano, on the seacoast, lies Catania, a large town surrounded then by strong walls. Already the liquid fire had devoured several villages, when the stream reached the walls of Catania and spread over the country. There, as if to show its strength to the terrified Catanians, it tore a hill away and transported it some distance; it lifted in one mass a field planted with vines and let it float for some time, until the green was reduced to charcoal and disappeared. Finally, the fiery stream reached a wide and deep valley. The Catanians believed themselves saved: no doubt the volcano would exhaust its strength by the time it covered the vast basin which the lava had just entered. But what an error of judgment! In the short space of six hours, the valley was filled, and the lava, overflowing, advanced straight toward the town in a stream half a league wide and ten meters high. It would have been all over with Catania if, by the luckiest chance, another current, whose direction crossed the first, had not come and struck against the fiery flood and turned it from its course. The stream, thus turned, coasted the ramparts of the town within pistol-shot, and turned toward the sea.” “I was very much afraid for those poor Catanians,” interposed Emile, “when you spoke of that wall of fire, high as a house, going straight toward the town.” “All is not over yet,” his uncle proceeded. “The stream, I told you, was going toward the sea. There was, then, a formidable battle between the water and the fire. The lava presented a perpendicular front of 1500 meters in extent and a dozen meters high. At the touch of that burning wall, which continued plunging further and further into the waves, enormous masses of vapor rose with horrible hissings, darkened the sky with their thick clouds, and fell in a salt rain over all the region. In a few days the lava had made the limits of the shore recede three hundred meters. “In spite of that, Catania was still menaced. The stream, swollen with new tributaries, grew from day to day and approached the town. From the top of the walls the inhabitants followed with terror the implacable progress of the scourge. The lava finally reached the ramparts. The fiery flood rose slowly, but it rose ceaselessly; from hour to hour it was found to have risen a little higher. It touched the top of the walls, whereupon, yielding to the pressure, they were overthrown for the length of forty meters, and the stream of fire penetrated the town.” “My goodness!” cried Claire. “Those poor people are lost?” “No, not the people, for lava runs very slowly, on account of its sticky nature, and one can be warned in time; it was the town itself that ran the greatest risk. The quarters invaded by the lava were the highest; from there the current could spread everywhere. So Catania seemed destined to total destruction, when it was saved by the courage of some men who attempted to battle with the volcano. They bethought themselves to construct stone walls, which, placed across the route of the on-coming stream, would change its direction. This device partly succeeded, but the following was the most efficacious. Lava streams envelop themselves in a kind of solid sheath, embank themselves in a canal formed of blocks coagulated and welded together. Under this covering the melted matter preserves its fluidity and continues its ravaging course. They thought, then, that by breaking these natural dikes at a well-chosen spot, they would open to the lava a new route across country and would thus turn it from the town. Followed by a hundred alert and vigorous men, they attacked the stream, not far from the volcano, with blows of iron bars. The heat was so great that each worker could strike only two or three blows in succession, after which he withdrew to recover his breath. However, they managed to make a breach in the solid sheath, when, as they had foreseen, the lava flowed through this opening. Catania was saved, not without great loss, for already the lava flood had consumed, within the town walls, three hundred houses and some palaces and churches. Outside of Catania, this eruption, so sadly celebrated, covered from five to six square leagues with a bed of lava in some places thirteen meters thick, and destroyed the homes of twenty-seven thousand persons.” “Without those brave men who did not hesitate, at the risk of being burnt alive, to go and open a new passage for the stream of fire, Catania would certainly have been lost,” remarked Jules. “Catania would have been all burnt down, there is no doubt. To-day its calcined ruins would be buried under a bed of cold lava, and there would be nothing left but the name of the large town that had disappeared. Three or four stout-hearted men revive the courage of the terrified population; they hope that heaven will aid them in their devotion, and, ready to sacrifice their lives, they prevent the frightful disaster. Ah! may God give you grace, my dear child, to imitate them in the time of danger; for, you see, if man is great through his intelligence, he is still greater through his heart. In my old age, when I hear you spoken of, I shall be more gladdened by the good you may have done than by the knowledge you may have acquired. Knowledge, my little friend, is only a better means of aiding others. Remember that well, and when you are a man bear yourself in danger as did those of Catania. I ask it of you in return for my love and my stories.” Jules furtively wiped away a tear. His uncle perceived that he had sown his word in good ground. About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. Jean-Henri Fabre (2018). The Story-book of Science. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/56795/pg56795-images.html This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org , located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html.

Etna is that volcano in Sicily

The Story-book of Science by Jean-Henri Fabre, is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . VOLCANOES CHAPTER XLV. VOLCANOES “IT is not late yet, Uncle,” said Jules; “you ought to tell us about those terrible mountains, those volcanoes that the showers of ashes come from.” At the word “volcano,” Emile, who was already asleep, rubbed his eyes and became all attention. He too wanted to hear the great story. As usual, their uncle yielded to their entreaties. “A volcano is a mountain that throws up smoke, calcined dust, red-hot stones, and melted matter called lava. The summit is hollowed out in a great excavation having the shape of a funnel, sometimes several leagues in circumference. That is what we call the crater. The bottom of the crater communicates with a tortuous conduit or chimney too deep to estimate. The principal volcanoes of Europe are: Vesuvius, near Naples; Etna in Sicily; Hecla in Iceland. Most of the time a volcano is either in repose or throwing up a simple plume of smoke; but from time to time, with intervals that may be very long, the mountain grumbles, trembles, and vomits torrents of fiery substances. It is then said to be in eruption. To give you a general idea of the most remarkable phenomena attending volcanic eruption, I will choose Vesuvius, the best known of the European volcanoes. “An eruption is generally announced beforehand by a column of smoke that fills the orifice of the crater and rises vertically, when the air is calm, to nearly a mile in height. At this elevation it spreads out in a sort of blanket that intercepts the sun’s rays. Some days before the eruption the column of smoke sinks down on the volcano, covering it with a big black cloud. Then the earth begins to tremble around Vesuvius; rumbling detonations under the ground are heard, louder and louder each moment, soon exceeding in intensity the most violent claps of thunder. You would think you heard the cannonades of a numerous artillery detonating ceaselessly in the mountain’s sides. “All at once a sheaf of fire bursts from the crater to the height of 2000 or 3000 meters. The cloud that is floating over the volcano is illumined by the redness of the fire; the sky seems inflamed. Millions of sparks dart out like lightning to the top of the blazing sheaf, describe great arcs, leaving on their way dazzling trails, and fall in a shower of fire on the slopes of the volcano. These sparks, so small from a distance, are incandescent masses of stone, sometimes several meters in dimension, and of a sufficient momentum to crush the most solid buildings in their fall. What hand-made machine could throw such masses of rock to such heights? What all our efforts united could not do even once, the volcano does over and over again, as if in play. For whole weeks and months these red blocks are thrown up by Vesuvius, in numbers like the sparks of a display of fireworks.” “It is both terrible and beautiful,” said Jules. “Oh! how I should like to see an eruption, but far off, of course.” “And the people who are on the mountain?” questioned Emile. “They are careful not to go on the mountain at that time; they might lose their lives, suffocated by the smoke or crushed by the shower of red-hot stones. “Meantime, from the depths of the mountain, through the volcanic chimney, ascends a flux of melted mineral substance, or lava, which pours out into the crater and forms a lake of fire as dazzling as the sun. Spectators who, from the plain, anxiously follow the progress of the eruption, are warned of the coming of the lava-flood by the brilliant illumination it throws on the volumes of smoke floating in the upper air. But the crater is full; then the ground suddenly shakes, bursts open with a noise of thunder, and through the crevasses as well as over the edges of the crater the lava flows in streams. The fiery current, formed of dazzling and paste-like matter similar to melted metal, advances slowly; the front of the lava-stream resembles a moving rampart on fire. One can flee before it, but everything stationary is lost. Trees blaze a moment on contact with the lava and sink down, reduced to charcoal; the thickest walls are calcined and fall over; the hardest rocks are vitrified, melted. “The flow of lava comes to an end, sooner or later. Then subterranean vapors, freed from the enormous pressure of the fluid mass, escape with more violence than ever, carrying with them whirlwinds of fine dust that floats in sinister clouds and sinks down on the neighboring plain, or is even carried by the winds to a distance of hundreds of leagues. Finally, the terrible mountain calms down, and peace is restored for an indefinite time.” “If there are towns near the volcanoes, cannot those streams of fire reach them? Cannot those clouds of ashes bury them?” asked Jules. “Unfortunately all that is possible and has happened. I will tell you about it to-morrow, for it is time to go to bed now.” About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. Jean-Henri Fabre (2018). The Story-book of Science. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/56795/pg56795-images.html This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org , located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html.

At the word “volcano,”

EARTHQUAKES AND VOLCANOES

In recent years, as the meteoric growth of decentralization continues, one topic won't go away: the environmental cost of blockchain technologies and cryptocurrencies. Depending on which estimate you believe, the global energy required for mining Bitcoin is between 67 and 121 terawatt-hours a year. For example, the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance (CCAF) estimates that around 110 terawatt-hours per year. Bitcoin consumes That is about half of what all data centers - which help power the internet, cloud computing, and the other 4,500+ cryptocurrencies (plus the entire financial sector) - consume. By comparison, that's around the same amount of energy used by Sweden. However, one of the reasons for the high energy cost of Bitcoin and friends is not due to the blockchain at all. Simply put, if we produced sustainable energy in the first place, energy use wouldn't be such a big deal. "About 80% of the hash rate - the combined computing power for mining and processing Bitcoins - is provided in Asian countries," Olga Vorobyeva (Olga Vox), Founder at Vox Consulting, told me. "And none of those countries generates more than 25% of their electricity from renewable sources. Another 15% of the computing power comes from the US and Russia, and neither of those can claim to be bastions of green energy production." Don't despair just yet. Whether solutions have been created as a result of external pressure, internal reflection, or even as a political experiment, there are a significant number of people working to redress the balance. Some approach the problem through changes in how crypto transactions are mined, and others focus on the energy source that powers that process. Recently, the president of El Salvador - Nayib Bukele - proclaimed that the country had mined 0.00599179 bitcoin (approximately $350 at the time of writing) using power harnessed from a volcano. And the president seems to be going all-in on a massive Bitcoin experiment. Along with the tweet that proudly announced the results of its early experiments in sustainable mining, the president showing government-branded containers full of mining rigs and the geothermal energy production that powers them. posted a teaser video "Using volcanos to mine Bitcoin isn't new," Vorobyeva said. "The second biggest mining farm globally that we know of is in Reykjavik, Iceland. It uses an estimated 90% of the country's geothermal energy production, and almost all of the energy generated in Iceland is renewable. It stands as a great example to all and a pioneer in Bitcoin mining." Energy sources aren't the only way to reduce the footprint associated with Bitcoin. Bitcoin relies on a highly wasteful proof of work algorithm. And while everyone loves to cheer a new price milestone for BTC, any increase in Bitcoin's price results in more significant mining activity, which leads to higher electricity consumption. "There are more efficient ways to maintain the integrity of a cryptocurrency, and not just in terms of energy consumption," Vorobyeva said. "The current alternatives improve transaction speeds, which helps to improve the usability and capability of those cryptocurrencies that avoid proof of work systems." Proof of stake is an alternative to proof of work, and a pioneer in the peer-reviewed blockchain landscape - Cardano - demonstrates just how efficient this method can be. The founder of Cardano claims that the cryptocurrency network only 6 GWh of power. consumes "I've also been impressed with Hedera Hashgraph, which passed the number of completed Ethereum transactions in May this year, making it one of the world's biggest cryptocurrency networks," Vorobyeva said. "In theory, Hedera Hashgraph can process more than 100,000 transactions per second, which would allow it to easily rival Visa, Mastercard, and other mainstream payment systems." Another approach is seen in the Nano cryptocurrency. Nano uses block-lattice technology. It still relies on a proof of work mechanism, but block-lattice creates an account chain for each user. Account-holders vote for a chosen representative, who then work to confirm blocks of transactions securely. User accounts can be updated asynchronously rather than involving an entire linear blockchain, as with Bitcoin. But, despite all of this, there is one fundamental thing to consider when it comes to the energy used to power the world's blockchain projects; the perception of energy against value. "Ultimately, it is up to the blockchain community to produce valuable products and services that improve our lives," Vorobyeva said. "If the industry's perception is that it is full of scammers, Ponzi schemes, and crooks, then the cost of any blockchain project will be seen as 'too high.' The more value we create for humanity, the more the cost of providing that value will be seen as worthwhile. Of course, that doesn't mean the industry should forget about its responsibilities. Still, with so many advancements in improving the wasteful proof of work method Bitcoin uses, I'm confident the future of cryptocurrencies is a green one."

Volcanos and New Proof Methods are great, but Bitcoin's Energy Problem Falls on the Community

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 4 of 11. PLAINTIFFS AND THEIR COPYRIGHTED SOUND RECORDINGS 16. Plaintiffs are the copyright owners of, and/or control exclusive rights with respect to, millions of sound recordings, including many recorded by some of the most prolific and well-known recording artists throughout the world. 17. Plaintiff UMG Recordings, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 2220 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90404. 18. Plaintiff Capitol Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 2220 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90404. 19. Plaintiff ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. is a New York corporation with its principal place of business at 85 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10003. 20. Plaintiff Asylum Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 21. Plaintiff Atlantic Recording Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 22. Plaintiff Atlantic Records Group LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 23. Plaintiff Bad Boy Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 24. Plaintiff Big Beat Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 25. Plaintiff Elektra Entertainment Group Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 26. Plaintiff Elektra Entertainment LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 27. Plaintiff Fueled by Ramen LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 28. Plaintiff Lava Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 29. Plaintiff Maverick Recording Company is a California general partnership with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 30. Plaintiff Nonesuch Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 31. Plaintiff Rhino Entertainment Company is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 32. Plaintiff Rhino Entertainment LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 33. Plaintiff Roadrunner Records, Inc. is a New York corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 34. Plaintiff Rykodisc, Inc. is a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 35. Plaintiff Warner Music Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 36. Plaintiff Warner Music International Services Limited is a limited liability company, organized and existing under the laws of England and Wales, with its principal place of business at 27 Wrights Lane, London, England. 37. Plaintiff Warner Music Latina Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 555 Washington Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida 33139. 38. Plaintiff Warner Music Nashville LLC is a Tennessee limited liability company with its principal place of business at 20 Music Square East, Nashville, Tennessee 37203. 39. Plaintiff Warner Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 40. Plaintiff Warner Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 41. Plaintiff Warner Records/QRI Venture, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 42. Plaintiff Warner Records/SIRE Ventures LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 43. Plaintiff Arista Music is a New York partnership with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010 44. Plaintiff Arista Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 45. Plaintiff LaFace Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 46. Plaintiff Sony Music Entertainment is a Delaware general partnership, the partners of which are citizens of New York and Delaware. Sony Music Entertainment’s headquarters and principal place of business are located at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 47. Plaintiff Sony Music Entertainment US Latin LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 3390 Mary Street, Suite 220, Coconut Grove, Florida 33133. 48. Plaintiff Ultra Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 49. Plaintiff Volcano Entertainment III, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 50. Plaintiff Zomba Recording LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 51. Plaintiffs own and/or control in whole or in part the copyrights and/or exclusive U.S. rights in innumerable popular sound recordings, including at the time of the infringements at issue here, and including the sound recordings listed on Exhibit A, which are illustrative and nonexhaustive. All of the sound recordings listed on Exhibit A have been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office or, for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, identified on schedules filed with the U.S. Copyright Office pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1401. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 4 of 11. UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part of this filing here . This part is 4 of 11. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here here PLAINTIFFS AND THEIR COPYRIGHTED SOUND RECORDINGS 16. Plaintiffs are the copyright owners of, and/or control exclusive rights with respect to, millions of sound recordings, including many recorded by some of the most prolific and well-known recording artists throughout the world. 17. Plaintiff UMG Recordings, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 2220 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90404. 18. Plaintiff Capitol Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 2220 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90404. 19. Plaintiff ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. is a New York corporation with its principal place of business at 85 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10003. 20. Plaintiff Asylum Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 21. Plaintiff Atlantic Recording Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 22. Plaintiff Atlantic Records Group LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 23. Plaintiff Bad Boy Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 24. Plaintiff Big Beat Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 25. Plaintiff Elektra Entertainment Group Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 26. Plaintiff Elektra Entertainment LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 27. Plaintiff Fueled by Ramen LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 28. Plaintiff Lava Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 29. Plaintiff Maverick Recording Company is a California general partnership with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 30. Plaintiff Nonesuch Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 31. Plaintiff Rhino Entertainment Company is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 32. Plaintiff Rhino Entertainment LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 33. Plaintiff Roadrunner Records, Inc. is a New York corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 34. Plaintiff Rykodisc, Inc. is a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 35. Plaintiff Warner Music Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 36. Plaintiff Warner Music International Services Limited is a limited liability company, organized and existing under the laws of England and Wales, with its principal place of business at 27 Wrights Lane, London, England. 37. Plaintiff Warner Music Latina Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 555 Washington Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida 33139. 38. Plaintiff Warner Music Nashville LLC is a Tennessee limited liability company with its principal place of business at 20 Music Square East, Nashville, Tennessee 37203. 39. Plaintiff Warner Records Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 40. Plaintiff Warner Records LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 41. Plaintiff Warner Records/QRI Venture, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 777 S. Santa Fe Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90021. 42. Plaintiff Warner Records/SIRE Ventures LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1633 Broadway, New York, New York 10019. 43. Plaintiff Arista Music is a New York partnership with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010 44. Plaintiff Arista Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 45. Plaintiff LaFace Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 46. Plaintiff Sony Music Entertainment is a Delaware general partnership, the partners of which are citizens of New York and Delaware. Sony Music Entertainment’s headquarters and principal place of business are located at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 47. Plaintiff Sony Music Entertainment US Latin LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 3390 Mary Street, Suite 220, Coconut Grove, Florida 33133. 48. Plaintiff Ultra Records, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 49. Plaintiff Volcano Entertainment III, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 50. Plaintiff Zomba Recording LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 25 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10010. 51. Plaintiffs own and/or control in whole or in part the copyrights and/or exclusive U.S. rights in innumerable popular sound recordings, including at the time of the infringements at issue here, and including the sound recordings listed on Exhibit A, which are illustrative and nonexhaustive. All of the sound recordings listed on Exhibit A have been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office or, for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, identified on schedules filed with the U.S. Copyright Office pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1401. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. storage.courtlistener

Universal Music, Warner, Sony Among Plaintiffs in Verizon Copyright Suit

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 1 of 11. PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Plaintiffs UMG Recordings, Inc. and Capitol Records, LLC (collectively, “UMG” or the “Universal Plaintiffs”); Plaintiffs Asylum Records LLC, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Atlantic Records Group LLC, Bad Boy Records LLC, Big Beat Records Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Elektra Entertainment LLC, Fueled by Ramen LLC, Lava Records LLC, Maverick Recording Company, Nonesuch Records Inc., Rhino Entertainment Company, Rhino Entertainment LLC, Roadrunner Records, Inc., Rykodisc, Inc., Warner Music Inc., Warner Music International Services Limited, Warner Music Latina Inc., Warner Music Nashville LLC, Warner Records Inc., Warner Records LLC, Warner Records/QRI Venture, Inc., and Warner Records/SIRE Ventures LLC (collectively, “WMG” or the “Warner Plaintiffs”); Plaintiffs Arista Music, Arista Records, LLC, LaFace Records, LLC, Sony Music Entertainment, Sony Music Entertainment US Latin LLC, Ultra Records, LLC, Volcano Entertainment III, LLC, and Zomba Recording LLC (collectively, “SME” or the “Sony Plaintiffs”); and ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. (“ABKCO,” and together with the Universal Plaintiffs, the Warner Plaintiffs, and the Sony Plaintiffs, the “Record Companies” or “Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorneys Oppenheim + Zebrak, LLP, for their Complaint against defendants Verizon Communications Inc., Verizon Services Corp., and Cellco Partnership (d/b/a Verizon Wireless) (collectively, “Verizon” or “Defendants”), allege, on personal knowledge as to matters relating to themselves and on information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Verizon is one of the largest Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) in the country and knowingly provides its high-speed service to a massive community of online pirates, who it knows repeatedly use that service to infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights. Over the past few years alone, Plaintiffs sent Verizon hundreds of thousands of copyright infringement notices. Those notices identify specific subscribers on Verizon’s network stealing Plaintiffs’ sound recordings through peer-to-peer (“P2P”) file-sharing networks that are notorious hotbeds for copyright infringement. While Verizon is famous for its “Can you hear me now?” advertising campaign, it has intentionally chosen not to listen to complaints from copyright owners. Instead of taking action in response to those infringement notices as the law requires, Verizon ignored Plaintiffs’ notices and buried its head in the sand. Undeterred, infringing subscribers identified in Plaintiffs’ notices continued to use Verizon’s services to infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights with impunity. Meanwhile, Verizon continued to provide its high-speed service to thousands of known repeat infringers so it could continue to collect millions of dollars from them. 2. Plaintiffs bring this action against Verizon for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. Verizon has knowingly contributed to, and reaped substantial profits from, massive copyright infringement committed by tens of thousands of its subscribers. By ignoring Plaintiffs’ notices and its own legal obligations, Verizon facilitated its subscribers’ infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrights through the continued provision of its high-speed Internet service to known repeat infringers. 3. Plaintiffs are record companies or recorded music businesses that produce, manufacture, distribute, sell, and license commercial sound recordings both in the United States and internationally. Through their enormous investments of money, time, and exceptional creative efforts, Plaintiffs and the recording artists they represent have developed and/or distributed some of the world’s most famous music. Their investments and creative efforts have shaped the musical landscape as we know it, both in the United States and around the world. As a result, Plaintiffs own and/or control exclusive rights to many of the most popular sound recordings performed by classic artists and contemporary superstars, including The Rolling Stones, Ariana Grande, Bob Dylan, Bruno Mars, Elvis Presley, Dua Lipa, Drake, and many more. 4. Verizon markets and sells high-speed Internet services to consumers nationwide. Through the provision of those services, Verizon contributed to and profited from pervasive copyright infringement by its subscribers on P2P file-sharing networks. Verizon’s contribution to its subscribers’ infringement is both willful and extensive, and it renders Verizon equally liable for that infringement. Indeed, for years, Verizon deliberately refused to take action to prevent its customers from using its Internet services to infringe others’ copyrights, including Plaintiffs’ copyrights—even after Verizon was put on notice of particular customers engaging in specific, repeated acts of infringement. 5. Since early 2020, Plaintiffs’ representatives have sent more than 340,000 infringement notices to Verizon. Those notices clearly and unambiguously advised Verizon of its subscribers’ blatant and systematic use of Verizon’s Internet service to illegally download, copy, and distribute Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings through the P2P network known as BitTorrent. 6. The scope of repeat infringement on Verizon’s network is staggering. Thousands of Verizon subscribers were the subject of 20 or more notices from Plaintiffs, and more than 500 subscribers were the subject of 100 or more notices. One particularly egregious Verizon subscriber was single-handedly the subject of 4,450 infringement notices from Plaintiffs alone. 7. Verizon acknowledged that it received these notices of infringement sent by Plaintiffs’ representatives. Yet rather than taking any steps to address its customers’ illegal use of its network, Verizon deliberately chose to ignore Plaintiffs’ notices, willfully blinding itself to that information and prioritizing its own profits over its legal obligations. 8. It is well-established law that if a party materially assists someone it knows is engaging in copyright infringement, that party is fully liable for the infringement as if it had infringed directly. Further, when a party has a direct financial interest in the infringing activity, and the right and practical ability to stop or limit it, that party also faces liability. Flouting those basic responsibilities, Verizon deliberately turned a blind eye to its subscribers’ infringement. Verizon failed to terminate or otherwise take any meaningful action against the accounts of repeat infringers of which it was aware. Instead, Verizon routinely thumbed its nose at Plaintiffs by continuing to provide its service to subscribers it knew to be serially infringing Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings. In reality, Verizon operated its service as an attractive tool and safe haven for infringement. 9. Verizon has derived an obvious and direct financial benefit from its subscribers’ infringement. The unlimited ability to download and distribute Plaintiffs’ copyrighted works through Verizon’s service has served as a draw for Verizon to attract, retain, and charge higher fees to infringing subscribers. By failing to terminate the accounts of specific recidivist infringers known to Verizon, Verizon obtained a direct financial benefit from those subscribers’ continuing infringing activity. That financial benefit included improper revenue that Verizon would not have received had it appropriately shut down those accounts as well as the costs that Verizon saved by failing to implement an effective repeat infringer program. In other words, Verizon decided not to terminate repeat infringers because it wanted to maintain the revenue generated from those subscribers’ accounts. 10. To be clear, the infringing activity of Verizon’s subscribers that is the subject of Plaintiffs’ claims, and for which Verizon is secondarily liable, all occurred after Verizon received multiple notices of each subscriber’s infringing activity. Plaintiffs seek damages for infringement of their sound recordings by Verizon subscribers after those particular subscribers were identified to Verizon in multiple infringement notices. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 1 of 11. UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Verizon Communications Inc., Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part of this filing here . This part is 1 of 11. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here here . PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Plaintiffs UMG Recordings, Inc. and Capitol Records, LLC (collectively, “UMG” or the “Universal Plaintiffs”); Plaintiffs Asylum Records LLC, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Atlantic Records Group LLC, Bad Boy Records LLC, Big Beat Records Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Elektra Entertainment LLC, Fueled by Ramen LLC, Lava Records LLC, Maverick Recording Company, Nonesuch Records Inc., Rhino Entertainment Company, Rhino Entertainment LLC, Roadrunner Records, Inc., Rykodisc, Inc., Warner Music Inc., Warner Music International Services Limited, Warner Music Latina Inc., Warner Music Nashville LLC, Warner Records Inc., Warner Records LLC, Warner Records/QRI Venture, Inc., and Warner Records/SIRE Ventures LLC (collectively, “WMG” or the “Warner Plaintiffs”); Plaintiffs Arista Music, Arista Records, LLC, LaFace Records, LLC, Sony Music Entertainment, Sony Music Entertainment US Latin LLC, Ultra Records, LLC, Volcano Entertainment III, LLC, and Zomba Recording LLC (collectively, “SME” or the “Sony Plaintiffs”); and ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. (“ABKCO,” and together with the Universal Plaintiffs, the Warner Plaintiffs, and the Sony Plaintiffs, the “Record Companies” or “Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorneys Oppenheim + Zebrak, LLP, for their Complaint against defendants Verizon Communications Inc., Verizon Services Corp., and Cellco Partnership (d/b/a Verizon Wireless) (collectively, “Verizon” or “Defendants”), allege, on personal knowledge as to matters relating to themselves and on information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Verizon is one of the largest Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) in the country and knowingly provides its high-speed service to a massive community of online pirates, who it knows repeatedly use that service to infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights. Over the past few years alone, Plaintiffs sent Verizon hundreds of thousands of copyright infringement notices. Those notices identify specific subscribers on Verizon’s network stealing Plaintiffs’ sound recordings through peer-to-peer (“P2P”) file-sharing networks that are notorious hotbeds for copyright infringement. While Verizon is famous for its “Can you hear me now?” advertising campaign, it has intentionally chosen not to listen to complaints from copyright owners. Instead of taking action in response to those infringement notices as the law requires, Verizon ignored Plaintiffs’ notices and buried its head in the sand. Undeterred, infringing subscribers identified in Plaintiffs’ notices continued to use Verizon’s services to infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights with impunity. Meanwhile, Verizon continued to provide its high-speed service to thousands of known repeat infringers so it could continue to collect millions of dollars from them. 2. Plaintiffs bring this action against Verizon for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. Verizon has knowingly contributed to, and reaped substantial profits from, massive copyright infringement committed by tens of thousands of its subscribers. By ignoring Plaintiffs’ notices and its own legal obligations, Verizon facilitated its subscribers’ infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrights through the continued provision of its high-speed Internet service to known repeat infringers. 3. Plaintiffs are record companies or recorded music businesses that produce, manufacture, distribute, sell, and license commercial sound recordings both in the United States and internationally. Through their enormous investments of money, time, and exceptional creative efforts, Plaintiffs and the recording artists they represent have developed and/or distributed some of the world’s most famous music. Their investments and creative efforts have shaped the musical landscape as we know it, both in the United States and around the world. As a result, Plaintiffs own and/or control exclusive rights to many of the most popular sound recordings performed by classic artists and contemporary superstars, including The Rolling Stones, Ariana Grande, Bob Dylan, Bruno Mars, Elvis Presley, Dua Lipa, Drake, and many more. 4. Verizon markets and sells high-speed Internet services to consumers nationwide. Through the provision of those services, Verizon contributed to and profited from pervasive copyright infringement by its subscribers on P2P file-sharing networks. Verizon’s contribution to its subscribers’ infringement is both willful and extensive, and it renders Verizon equally liable for that infringement. Indeed, for years, Verizon deliberately refused to take action to prevent its customers from using its Internet services to infringe others’ copyrights, including Plaintiffs’ copyrights—even after Verizon was put on notice of particular customers engaging in specific, repeated acts of infringement. 5. Since early 2020, Plaintiffs’ representatives have sent more than 340,000 infringement notices to Verizon. Those notices clearly and unambiguously advised Verizon of its subscribers’ blatant and systematic use of Verizon’s Internet service to illegally download, copy, and distribute Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings through the P2P network known as BitTorrent. 6. The scope of repeat infringement on Verizon’s network is staggering. Thousands of Verizon subscribers were the subject of 20 or more notices from Plaintiffs, and more than 500 subscribers were the subject of 100 or more notices. One particularly egregious Verizon subscriber was single-handedly the subject of 4,450 infringement notices from Plaintiffs alone. 7. Verizon acknowledged that it received these notices of infringement sent by Plaintiffs’ representatives. Yet rather than taking any steps to address its customers’ illegal use of its network, Verizon deliberately chose to ignore Plaintiffs’ notices, willfully blinding itself to that information and prioritizing its own profits over its legal obligations. 8. It is well-established law that if a party materially assists someone it knows is engaging in copyright infringement, that party is fully liable for the infringement as if it had infringed directly. Further, when a party has a direct financial interest in the infringing activity, and the right and practical ability to stop or limit it, that party also faces liability. Flouting those basic responsibilities, Verizon deliberately turned a blind eye to its subscribers’ infringement. Verizon failed to terminate or otherwise take any meaningful action against the accounts of repeat infringers of which it was aware. Instead, Verizon routinely thumbed its nose at Plaintiffs by continuing to provide its service to subscribers it knew to be serially infringing Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings. In reality, Verizon operated its service as an attractive tool and safe haven for infringement. 9. Verizon has derived an obvious and direct financial benefit from its subscribers’ infringement. The unlimited ability to download and distribute Plaintiffs’ copyrighted works through Verizon’s service has served as a draw for Verizon to attract, retain, and charge higher fees to infringing subscribers. By failing to terminate the accounts of specific recidivist infringers known to Verizon, Verizon obtained a direct financial benefit from those subscribers’ continuing infringing activity. That financial benefit included improper revenue that Verizon would not have received had it appropriately shut down those accounts as well as the costs that Verizon saved by failing to implement an effective repeat infringer program. In other words, Verizon decided not to terminate repeat infringers because it wanted to maintain the revenue generated from those subscribers’ accounts. 10. To be clear, the infringing activity of Verizon’s subscribers that is the subject of Plaintiffs’ claims, and for which Verizon is secondarily liable, all occurred after Verizon received multiple notices of each subscriber’s infringing activity. Plaintiffs seek damages for infringement of their sound recordings by Verizon subscribers after those particular subscribers were identified to Verizon in multiple infringement notices. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on July 12, 2024, storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. storage.courtlistener

Volcaino

volcaino.com

10 employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

VOLCAINO

EVERGREEN INDEX #11920

Volcaino WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

Volcaino

volcaino.com

10 employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

VOLCAINO

EVERGREEN INDEX #11920

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT VOLCAINO

Volcaino WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!