Cs. Wright, Actual versus legal control: Reading vicarious liability for copyright infringement into the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, WASH LAW RE, 75(3), 2000, pp. 1005-1036
Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 purports to limit
the liability of Internet service providers that have been found vicariousl
y liable for copyright infringement. However, by basing this limitation on
the absence of the "benefit" and "control" elements of the common law test
for vicarious liability, the plain language of Title II, codified at 17 U.S
.C. 512, appears to preclude statutory protection once a court has found a
service provider vicariously liable. This Comment argues that courts must r
ead a narrow definition of "actual" control into 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(1)(B) in
order to preserve the liability limitations of Title II, to avoid structura
l conflict, and to fulfill legislative intent. This Comment locates actual
control in a line of district court cases from the Second Circuit that have
been eclipsed by the Ninth Circuit's embrace of "legal" control. This Comm
ent concludes that an actual-control standard best preserves incentives to
monitor for infringement.