Copyright law is intended to encourage creativity, but it is often misused to extract payouts. **Higbee & Associates**, a law firm known for sending copyright demand letters, targeted **May First Movement Technology**, accusing them of infringing on a photograph owned by **Agence France-Presse (AFP)**. The claim was unfounded, as May First did not post the photo nor own the website where it appeared. May First is a non-profit that offers web hosting and technical infrastructure to social justice groups. The image in question was posted years ago by one of May First's members, a human rights group based in Mexico. After May First learned of the complaint, they ensured the image was removed. Instead of dropping the matter, Higbee demanded payment. This prompted the **EFF** to step in as May First’s counsel, explaining why AFP and Higbee had no valid claim. After receiving the response, Higbee backed down. This case underscores that targets of copyright demands often have strong defenses, particularly when the material was posted by someone else. ### Hosting Content vs. Publishing Copyright law distinguishes between those who create or control content and those who provide the tools or infrastructure for communication. May First provided hosting services but did not post the photo. Courts have recognized that service providers are not direct infringers when they merely store material at the direction of users, lacking the “volitional conduct”—the intentional act of copying or distributing the work. Copyright law also acknowledges that intermediaries cannot realistically police every user upload. This is why protections like the **Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)** safe harbors exist. Even outside these safe harbors, courts shield service providers from liability when they promptly respond to notices. May First acted as expected by notifying its member, resulting in the image's removal. ### A Claim That Should Have Been Dropped Sooner The troubling aspect of this case is that Higbee and AFP continued to demand money and threaten litigation even after May First explained their role as a hosting provider and confirmed the image's removal. The claim was built on shaky legal ground from the beginning, and Higbee should have withdrawn its demand upon learning of May First's role. Individuals and small nonprofits shouldn't require lawyers to stop aggressive copyright shakedowns. ### Statutory Damages Fuel Abuse This case is not isolated but rather a predictable result of copyright law’s statutory damages regime. Statutory damages can reach $150,000 per work, regardless of actual harm. This leverage incentivizes firms like Higbee to send mass demand letters seeking quick settlements. Even meritless claims can generate revenue if recipients are too afraid, confused, or resource-constrained to fight back. This disproportionately affects community organizations, independent publishers, and small service providers without in-house legal teams. Faced with the threat of significant statutory damages, many simply pay the demanded amount. ### Know Your Rights If you receive a copyright demand based on material someone else posted, don’t assume liability. Possible defenses include: * Your role as a hosting or service provider * Lack of volitional conduct * Prompt removal of the material after notice * The statute of limitations * The copyright owner’s failure to timely register the work * The absence of actual damages Each situation is unique, but a demand letter does not equate to a valid legal claim. ### Standing Up to Copyright Trolls May First stood its ground, and Higbee abandoned its demand after the EFF explained the law. However, the larger issue persists. Copyright’s statutory damages framework enables aggressive enforcement tactics that target the wrong parties and chill lawful online activity. Until lawmakers address these structural incentives, organizations and individuals will continue facing pressure to pay up, even when they’ve done nothing wrong. If you receive such a demand letter, remember that you may have more rights than it suggests.