Perfect 10 (magazine)

Last updated
Perfect 10
Editor Norm Zada
Categories Men's magazine
Frequency Quarterly
Founded1997
Final issue2007 (print)
CountryUSA
LanguageEnglish
Website www.perfect10.com [ dead link ]
ISSN 1094-3927

Perfect 10 was a monthly men's magazine (later a quarterly), and adult website that featured high resolution topless or nude photographs of women who had not had cosmetic surgery. Perfect 10 also promoted and filmed boxing matches between a number of their models, which were called Perfect 10: Model Boxing on the Showtime and HDNet cable channels. The last print edition of the magazine was published in the summer of 2007 (issue 43), after which it switched to a subscription-based website-only presentation. [1]

Contents

History

Perfect 10 was founded by former computer science professor, championship poker player, and hedge fund manager Norm Zadeh [2] (now Zada) in the late 1990s when a friend was rejected from Playboy because she was not well-endowed. [3]

Lawsuits

It has been claimed that owner Zada spent minimal time (40 to 50 hours a year) creating content for the site, but "8 hours a day, 365 days a year" on litigation, leading some to call Perfect10 little more than a copyright troll – by 2015, the company had filed 20 to 30 lawsuits. [4] [5]

Perfect 10 v. Google, Inc.

In August 2005, Perfect 10 filed suit with the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to stop Google from caching and displaying thumbnails to third party sites which offer unlicensed images from Perfect 10, arguing that this interfered with their cell-phone thumbnail offer. In February 2006 the court granted the request in part and denied it in part, ruling that the thumbnails were infringing but links sites with images were not. In appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled almost entirely in favor of Google in Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. . The court ruled that Google's use of images was transformative and thus did not infringe Perfect 10's copyright. [6]

Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC

In 2006, Perfect 10 filed suit with United States District Court in California against CCBill for "violat[ing] copyright, trademark, and state unfair competition, false advertising and right of publicity laws by providing services to websites that posted images stolen from Perfect 10's magazine and website". [7]

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Megaupload Limited

In January 2011, Perfect 10 again filed suit with the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, demanding $5m in damages from Megaupload Limited (and its CEO, Kim Schmitz) for copyright infringement. [8]

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Giganews, Inc.

In April 2011, Perfect 10 sued Giganews, a prominent usenet provider, for both direct and indirect infringement. [9] Giganews prevailed on all grounds, and in March 2015 Perfect 10 was ordered to pay Giganews $5,213,117.06 in attorney's fees and $424,235.47 in costs. [9] [10] In January 2017 the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the original judgement. [11]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent troll</span> Pejorative term related to intellectual property

In international law and business, patent trolling or patent hoarding is a categorical or pejorative term applied to a person or company that attempts to enforce patent rights against accused infringers far beyond the patent's actual value or contribution to the prior art, often through hardball legal tactics. Patent trolls often do not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question. However, some entities, which do not practice their asserted patent, may not be considered "patent trolls", when they license their patented technologies on reasonable terms in advance.

In United States copyright law, transformative use or transformation is a type of fair use that builds on a copyrighted work in a different manner or for a different purpose from the original, and thus does not infringe its holder's copyright. Transformation is an important issue in deciding whether a use meets the first factor of the fair-use test, and is generally critical for determining whether a use is in fact fair, although no one factor is dispositive.

Megaupload Ltd was a Hong Kong–based online company established in 2005 that operated from 2005 to 2012 providing online services related to file storage and viewing.

Arts and media industry trade groups, such as the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), strongly oppose and attempt to prevent copyright infringement through file sharing. The organizations particularly target the distribution of files via the Internet using peer-to-peer software. Efforts by trade groups to curb such infringement have been unsuccessful with chronic, widespread and rampant infringement continuing largely unabated.

Norman Zada is a former adjunct mathematics professor and an entrepreneur. He is the founder of Perfect 10, an adult magazine focusing on women without cosmetic surgery, and runs the United States Investing Competition. Zada is the son of Lotfi Zadeh, the creator of fuzzy logic.

<i>Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.</i> 2007 American legal decision

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 was a case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit involving a copyright infringement claim against Amazon.com, Inc. and Google, Inc., by the magazine publisher Perfect 10, Inc. The court held that framing and hyperlinking of original images for use in an image search engine constituted a fair use of Perfect 10's images because the use was highly transformative, and thus not an infringement of the magazine's copyright ownership of the original images.

In copyright law, the legal status of hyperlinking and that of framing concern how courts address two different but related Web technologies. In large part, the legal issues concern use of these technologies to create or facilitate public access to proprietary media content — such as portions of commercial websites. When hyperlinking and framing have the effect of distributing, and creating routes for the distribution of content (information) that does not come from the proprietors of the Web pages affected by these practices, the proprietors often seek the aid of courts to suppress the conduct, particularly when the effect of the conduct is to disrupt or circumvent the proprietors' mechanisms for receiving financial compensation.

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Visa Int'l Serv. Ass'n is a court case in which the pornography magazine Perfect 10 filed a complaint against Visa and MasterCard for copyright infringement and trademark infringement.

<i>Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill, LLC</i>

Perfect 10, Inc. v. CCBill LLC, 488 F.3d 1102, is a U.S. court case between a publisher of an adult entertainment magazine and the webhosting, connectivity, and payment service companies. The plaintiff Perfect 10 asserted that defendants CCBill and CWIE violated copyright, trademark, and state law violation of right of publicity laws, unfair competition, false and misleading advertising by providing services to websites that posted images stolen from Perfect 10's magazine and website. Defendants sought to invoke statutory safe harbor exemptions from copyright infringement liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512, and from liability for state law unfair competition, false advertising claims and right of publicity based on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vringo</span>

Vringo was a technology company that became involved in the worldwide patent wars. The company won a 2012 intellectual property lawsuit against Google, in which a U.S. District Court ordered Google to pay 1.36 percent of U.S. AdWords sales. Analysts estimated Vringo's judgment against Google to be worth over $1 billion. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the District Court's ruling on appeal in August 2014 in a split 2-1 decision, which Intellectual Asset Magazine called "the most troubling case of 2014." Vringo appealed to the United States Supreme Court. Vringo also pursued worldwide litigation against ZTE Corporation in twelve countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Malaysia, India, Spain, Netherlands, Romania, China, Malaysia, Brazil and the United States. The high profile nature of the intellectual property suits filed by the firm against large corporations known for anti-patent tendencies has led some commentators to refer to the firm as a patent vulture or patent troll.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright troll</span> Party that enforces copyrights for purposes of making money through litigation

A copyright troll is a party that enforces copyrights it owns for purposes of making money through strategic litigation, in a manner considered unduly aggressive or opportunistic, sometimes without producing or licensing the works it owns for paid distribution. Critics object to the activity because they believe it does not encourage the production of creative works, but instead makes money through the inequities and unintended consequences of high statutory damages provisions in copyright laws intended to encourage creation of such works.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hotfile</span> File hosting website

Hotfile was a one-click file hosting website founded by Hotfile Corp in 2006 in Panama City, Panama. On December 4, 2013, Hotfile ceased all operations, the same day as signing a $4 million settlement with the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA); the settlement had previously been misreported as $80 million.

Righthaven LLC was a copyright enforcement company founded in early 2010. Based in Las Vegas, Nevada, it entered agreements from its partner newspapers after finding that their content had been copied to online sites without permission, in order to engage in litigation against the site owners for copyright infringement. The lawsuits were much criticized by commentators, who describe the activity as copyright trolling and the company as a "lawsuit factory". Righthaven LLC's CEO, Steven Gibson, who is currently a partner at Las Vegas law firm Gibson & True LLP, regularly spoke to the media about Righthaven.

<i>Righthaven LLC v. Democratic Underground LLC</i> 2011 US copyright infringement case

Righthaven LLC. v. Democratic Underground LLC, 791 F. Supp. 2d 968, was a copyright infringement case which determined that a contract giving a party right to sue on behalf of a copyright holder does not give the party legal standing to file such lawsuits. This case is one of over 200 similar cases filed by Righthaven against media outlets using content from Stephens Media. Judge Roger L. Hunt ruled that Righthaven lacked standing to file a copyright infringement suit and ordered Righthaven to show cause within two weeks why it should not be sanctioned for failure to disclose Stephens Media as an interested party.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Megaupload legal case</span>

Multiple criminal indictments and enforcement actions were taken against Megaupload owner Kim Dotcom in various jurisdictions. On 19 January 2012 the United States Department of Justice seized and shut down the file-hosting site Megaupload.com and commenced criminal cases against its owners and others. On 20 January 2012 Hong Kong Customs froze more than 300 million Hong Kong dollars in assets belonging to the company.

Prenda Law, also known as Steele | Hansmeier PLLP and Anti-Piracy Law Group, was a Chicago-based law firm that ostensibly operated by undertaking litigation against copyright infringement. However, it was later characterized by the United States District Court for Central California in a May 2013 ruling as a "porno-trolling collective" whose business model "relie[d] on deception", and which resembled most closely a conspiracy and racketeering enterprise, referring in the judgment to RICO, the U.S. Federal anti-racketeering law. The firm ostensibly dissolved itself in July 2013 shortly after the adverse ruling although onlookers described Alpha Law Firm LLC as its apparent replacement. In 2014, the ABA Journal described the "Prenda Law saga" as having entered "legal folklore".

<i>UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC</i> United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit case

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC, 667 F.3d 1022 No. 09-55902, was a United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit case in which UMG sued video-sharing website Veoh, alleging that Veoh committed copyright infringement by hosting user-uploaded videos copyrighted by UMG. The Ninth Circuit upheld the decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California that Veoh is protected under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provisions. It was established that service providers are "entitled to broad protection against copyright infringement liability so long as they diligently remove infringing material upon notice of infringement".

Rightscorp. Inc is a Los-Angeles based copyright enforcement company, which locates alleged copyright violators and collects money from legal damages as well as out of court settlements on behalf of the copyright holder(s). Rightscorp manages copyrights of videos, music, and video games.

Google has been involved in multiple lawsuits over issues such as privacy, advertising, intellectual property and various Google services such as Google Books and YouTube. The company's legal department expanded from one to nearly 100 lawyers in the first five years of business, and by 2014 had grown to around 400 lawyers. Google's Chief Legal Officer is Senior Vice President of Corporate Development David Drummond.

TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 581 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the venue in patent infringement lawsuits.

References

  1. "Issue 43, Summer 2007 - Vol. 8, No. 1 (LAST ISSUE)". perfect10.com. Retrieved August 22, 2014.
  2. "The secrets of Eddie Stern". Fortune . April 19, 2004. Archived from the original on August 22, 2004.
  3. Dana Calvo. "Naturally, he will try his breast. A nudie mag sans implants". Associated Press.
  4. Mullin, Joe (27 March 2015). ""Copyright troll" Perfect 10 hit with $5.6M in fees after failed Usenet assault". Ars Technica.
  5. Perfect 10, INC. v. Giganews, INC.
  6. "Perfect 10 Wants Alleged Infringers Removed From Google (#2)". chillingeffects.org.
  7. "Perfect 10 Magazine wins landmark court ruling".
  8. "BLM Perfect 10, Inc. v. Megaupload Limited et al - 3:11-cv-00191".
  9. 1 2 Mullin, Joe (March 27, 2015). "'Copyright troll' Perfect 10 hit with $5.6M in fees after failed Usenet assault". Ars Technica. Retrieved March 27, 2015.
  10. Perfect 10, Inc. v. Giganews, Inc., Order Granting Defendants’ Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Costs In Part And Awarding Defendants $5,213,117.06 In Attorneys’ Fees And $424,235.47 In Non-Taxable Costs no. 11-07098 (C.D. Cal. March 24, 2015). Retrieved March 27, 2015.
  11. Tue, Jan 24th 2017 8:35am-Mike Masnick. "Perfect 10 Loses Once Again, Sets More Good Copyright Precedent". Techdirt.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)