In October 2007, Jonathan Lee Riches, a federal inmate incarcerated in South Carolina, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Wyoming against celebrity blogger Mario Lavandeira. Riches has gained notoriety for bringing bizarre lawsuits (The Smoking Gun has coverage here and here). In this lawsuit, Riches claimed that Lavandeira "slandered me with hate and is distributing my copyrighted name Jonathan Lee Riches©, along with selling Anti Jonathan Lee Riches© mugs and T-shirts, stickers, buttons, hats."  The complaint also alleged that Lavandeira invaded his privacy by publishing a sex tape involving Riches on Perez Hilton. Riches requested an injunction shutting down Lavandeira's popular blog.

In December 2007, the court dismissed the case on its own motion, finding that the complaint did not state a claim and that it had no jurisdiction over the lawsuit.

Viacom Inc. alleged that independent filmmaker Christopher Knight infringed its copyright by posting a clip of a VH1 television program containing Knight's own video that VH1 had used without permission. YouTube removed Knight's clip at the request of Viacom, the parent company of the VH1 network.

According to Knight's blog post about the events, he made his own series of video campaign commercials when he ran for a school board seat in Rockingham County, North Carolina in 2006. After Knight posted the commercials on YouTube, one that contained humorous Star Wars imagery attracted the attention of producers at VH1. VH1 ran an episode of Web Junk 2.0 called "Animals & Other Crap" making fun of Knight's commercial and showing parts of it. By Knight's account, VH1 never requested his permission to use the commercial. On July 11, 2007 Knight posted a clip of this VH1 segment on YouTube.

On August 29, 2007, Knight received an email from YouTube informing him that it had removed his video of the VH1 segment in response to a DMCA takedown request from Viacom alleging that Knight had infringed its copyright in Web Junk 2.0 program content.

Professional photographer Steven Matteo sued Howard Rubin for defamation, copyright infringement, false light invasion of privacy, and interference with prospective economic advantage in Illinois federal court after Rubin posted criticism online of Matteo's photographs of the wedding of Rubin's daughter.  Rubin allegedly posted Matteo's photos, which Rubin said exemplified the problems with Matteo's work, and tried to dissuade other couples from hiring Matteo.

Rubin filed a motion to dismiss Matteo's case for failure to state a claim.  Rubin argued that Matteo failed to show copyright infringement because Rubin had permission to republish the photographs from his wife, who commissioned Matteo and had Matteo's permission to republish them.  In addition, Rubin said that Matteo had not shown he suffered financially from the alleged infringement or from the alleged interference.  Rubin argued that the defamation and false light claims were deficient because he had only stated his opinion about his personal dealings with Matteo. The court denied Rubin's motion, finding none of these arguments sufficient to justify dismissal.

The parties settled in April 2008.

On February 20, 2008, an anonymous plaintiff sued Jason Fortuny in Illinois federal court for copyright infringement, invasion of privacy through the publication of private facts, and intrusion, after Mr. Fortuny allegedly posted his photograph and personal information on the Internet.

Mr. Fortuny, a now-famous Internet "troll" who was featured in an August 2008 New York Times article, performed a notorious "Craigslist Experiment" in 2006, in which he posted a fake ad on Craigslist pretending to be a woman seeking a “str8 brutal dom muscular male” for sex. According to the New York Times, over one-hundred men responded, providing photographs and contact information. Mr. Fortuny allegedly posted this material to his blog, RFJason, and Encyclopedia Dramatica (described by the New York Times as "an online compendium of troll humor and troll lore"). Mr. Fortuny disputes posting the photographs and contact information to Encyclopaedia Dramatica.

One of the men who responded to Mr. Fortuny's prank filed the Illinois lawsuit, claiming that Fortuny violated his copyrights and invaded his privacy by posting his photograph and personal information. The complaint seeks $75,000 in damages and requests an injunction requiring Mr. Fortuny to remove the photograph and contact information from his website.

Mr. Fortuny is representing himself in the lawsuit. On July 11th, 2008, he filed a letter that the court treated as a motion to dismiss. The motion, in which Mr. Fortuny challenged the court's jurisdiction over him and the substance of the plaintiff's claims, is pending.

Before filing suit, the anonymous plaintiff sent Mr. Fortuny and his web host a DMCA takedown notice. Mr. Fortuny sent a counter-notification, and his host restored the material. Please see our related database entry, Doe v. Fortuny (Correspondence).

Update:

4/9/09 - The court entered a default judgment against Fortuny, requiring him to pay $74,252.56 in damages, attorneys fees, and costs.