Given the large number of attempts at legal sanctions which have all failed, I'm not so sure that an out-of-court settlement is that interesting. So yes, that's what I think is important.
Edit: I'm having a hard time keeping up with your edits, can you stop editing at some point?
You've added 3 links about counterfitting. The DMCA only applies to copyrights, not trademarks or patents.
I think I only did one edit to add the cases, won't edit that comment any more.
I did disclaim that those are broader than DMCA. I'm well aware of the distinctions.
You're looking only for final judgements? I have a handful where a judge ordered the DMCA notice to be retracted and ordered them not to refile it, and then the case settled, presumably on favorable terms.
I agree DMCA cases seem to be harder to win than trademark/patent abuse.
>A required retraction is not much of a legal sanction.
It gives somewhat of a hint about the nature of the settlement, which in most cases is private. There do seem to be a decent number of settlements; my guess is the most egregious cases all settle, and the ones that move forward are harder to win.
>Since Curtis repeatedly alleged that Defendants knew that the takedown notices contained false infringement allegations, she adequately pleaded all of § 512(f)’s elements.
Edit: I'm having a hard time keeping up with your edits, can you stop editing at some point?
You've added 3 links about counterfitting. The DMCA only applies to copyrights, not trademarks or patents.