12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
- 3 -
09cv1836
The Secret of Selecting Stocks for Immediate and Substantial Gains:
Williamsalleges he discovered this work on Scribd’s website in March of 2009 and demanded thatit be taken down. (FAC ¶ 34.) It appeared again on March 31, 2009, on April 1, 2009, andwas still available, allegedly, as of May 7, 2009. (
Id.
)
The Right Stock at the Right Time:
This was discovered on Scribd’s website inMarch of 2009, taken down, discovered again on May 7, 2009, and taken down again. (FAC¶ 35.) It was again on Scribd’s website in August and October, 2009, once as a derivativework with the different title “2003 - 10 Year Pattern-in-the-United States Stock Market.” Itdidn’t disappear until January of 2010. (
Id.
)
Long Term Secrets to Short Term Trading:
Williams alleges he found this work onScribd’s website in March of 2009 and demanded it be removed on March 25, 2009. It wasthere, again, on May 7, 2009.Confusing matters slightly, Williams also alleges, but not until laying out his actualclaims for relief, that Scribd distributed the following copyrighted works:
Larry WilliamsForecast 2009
;
Inner Circle Workshop Notes
;
A Classic Larry Williams Trading Pattern
;
TheFalse Break Buy & Sell Pattern
;
My Million Dollar Stock Market Concept
; and
How to TradeBetter
. (FAC ¶ 38.) He does not specify when these works were discovered on Scribd’swebsite or when, if ever, he made a demand that they be removed.There is another side to this story that Williams omits to mention — and by so doingrisks denting his credibility with the Court. Scribd presents a good amount of evidence thatit was immediately responsive to many of Williams’s requests that his copyrighted materialbe removed from the website. For example, Scribd was notified by Williams that it wasinfringing his copyright in
The Secret of Selecting Stocks
on March 30, 2009, March 31,2009, April 1, 2009, May 12, 2009, and May 15, 2009, and each day Scribd removed theinfringing content from its website. The impression one gets reading Williams’s complaintis that infringing material was uploaded to Scribd’s website and then lingered there; the truthis more likely that Williams and Scribd were together playing a game of Whac-A-Mole, withWilliams monitoring Scribd for the presence of his copyrighted material and Scribd removing
Case 3:09-cv-01836-LAB -BGS Document 21 Filed 06/23/10 Page 3 of 17