Removal of Toddler's YouTube Dance Video May Cost Record Label

A Pennsylvania woman who posted to YouTube a home video of her toddler dancing to a popular '80s song has reasserted her copyright misrepresentation claim against the record label that had the video removed.

Stephanie Lenz of Gallitzin alleges that Universal Music Corp. violated federal copyright law by telling the video-sharing Web site that her posting violated the label's copyright in the song.

Lenz amended her original complaint after the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed the case and allowed her to refile some claims.

YouTube temporarily removed the video after Universal sent it a notice of infringement but reposted it after Lenz told the site that the video was non-infringing.

According to Lenz, the 29-second video depicted her 13-month-old son Holden dancing as the Prince hit "Let's Go Grazy" played in the background on a CD player. She says she posted it to YouTube in February 2007 for family members and friends to enjoy.

Four months later, the complaint says, Universal sent the Web site a letter demanding that it remove the video for copyright infringement. YouTube then allegedly told Lenz it was removing the video and that any future infringing posting could result in her account termination.

Congress revamped copyright law in response to the enormous reach of the Internet, allowing copyright owners to alert Internet service providers and Web sites about infringing material that appear on their systems. The ISPs and Web sites can avoid infringement liability if they promptly remove the material.

The law also allows people to file a "counter-notice" with a site host to assert that the posted material is non-infringing. YouTube reposted Lenz's video about six weeks after its removal because she filed such a notice, according to the complaint.

The law also provides financial penalties for entities that wrongly assert infringement to have material removed. Lenz says Universal did just that.

The record company should have known that her "typical home movie," with its blurry picture and poor sound quality, clearly constituted fair use of the song under copyright law, she says.

The original complaint alleged misrepresentation under the DMCA and tortious interference with Lenz's contractual relationship with YouTube. It sought a judicial declaration that she did not infringe any of Universal's copyrights.

Ruling on Universal's motion to dismiss, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel dismissed the declaratory judgment motion, finding no ripe case or controversy.

Universal denied any intent to sue Lenz directly, and the video has been available on YouTube since its reposting, he said.

The judge also dismissed the other two counts, and Lenz filed the amended complaint April 18.

The new action asserts only the misrepresentation claim and does not include the tortious-interference claim.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@Thomson.com.