https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2023/07/ninth-circuit-highlights-the-messy-law-of-contributory-trademark-infringement-online-yygm-v-redbubble.htm

If you want to read the whole article, there's the link. Basically what the courts are dealing with is, Contributory Infringement and �Willful Blindness.

The part that's entertaining and interesting for us, would be, rightsowners must send takedown notices to defendants, DMCA. And with that, agency is activly trying to prevent the illegal activity. There are some other points of argument, but this is interesting:  "Removing infringing listings and taking appropriate action against repeat infringers in response to specific notices may well be sufficient to show that a large online marketplace was not willfully blind.�


If an agency, knows that people are image thieves and repeatedly steal others images, instead of taking down only the offending images, they would be forced to take action.

Again, from the actual case and claims: "...the court says that the rightsowner can put the defendant on notice of �specific infringers.� This implies that rightsowners can force defendants to remove vendors for alleged infringement, instead of just removing their infringing items. The DMCA also directs services to remove repeat infringers, but only in accordance with their standard policy, whereas the YYGM standard implies a 1-strike rule to avoid future infringements by the identified alleged infringers."

YYGM is the trademark owner in this case.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-56236/21-56236-2023-07-24.html

"...the panel held that a party is liable for contributory infringement when it continues to supply its product to one whom it knows or has reason to know is engaging in trademark infringement. A party meets this standard if it is willfully blind to infringement."

Willfully blind to infringement!