Legal Question in Technology Law in California

What you describe is almost certainly not legal, but I can imagine unusual scenarios where it would be. I would need to know more about who, if anyone, actually is authorized to sell your shows and how they got that authority, along with whether they have made deals with any third parties involving those rights.

Feel free to contact me directly if you want to discuss your situation.

What Mr. Hoffman said.

I would add that the notion of requiring you to pay to have the material removed seems rather odd. I wonder whether you followed the procedure outlined in the Copyright Act -- the so-called DMCA "notice and take-down." See http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512.

The basic idea is that online service providers hosting user-supplied content can be immune from liability if they provide a contact person for infringement claims and, if you provide the proper notice, take the steps required by law (take down the material and notify the person that posted it, who may then file a counter-notice if they claim the material is not infringing, but you could then sue the individual directly for infringement). But if the ISP just gets a message from you that does not comply with the statutory requirements, it might be ignored completely.

The key portion about effective notice is quoted here:

"(3) Elements of notification. �

(A) To be effective under this subsection, a notification of claimed infringement must be a written communication provided to the designated agent of a service provider that includes substantially the following:

(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.

(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.

(iv) Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted.

(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

(B)(i) Subject to clause (ii), a notification from a copyright owner or from a person authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner that fails to comply substantially with the provisions of subparagraph (A) shall not be considered under paragraph (1)(A) in determining whether a service provider has actual knowledge or is aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent.

(ii) In a case in which the notification that is provided to the service provider's designated agent fails to comply substantially with all the provisions of subparagraph (A) but substantially complies with clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph (A), clause (i) of this subparagraph applies only if the service provider promptly attempts to contact the person making the notification or takes other reasonable steps to assist in the receipt of notification that substantially complies with all the provisions of subparagraph (A)."

Good luck.