Juelsgaard Clinic Sues to Protect Public Domain Access to Shakespeare’s Works – Mills Legal Clinic of Stanford Law School

Imagine a world bereft of Shakespearean adaptations. No Royal Shakespeare Company productions. No Shakespeare in the Park showings. No Lion King. Seminal 2011 animated film Gnomeo and Juliet—Romeo and Juliet but with gnomes—would not exist.

The world is better with Shakespeare, and other classical authors, firmly in the public domain. Not only does free use of these works enable individuals to transform and create new works on existing art, but it allows the public to easily access important cultural resources.

Following Coallier’s takedowns, Underwood contacted SbtS. The troupe informed him that they had never heard of “Julien Coallier,” nor had they used his “translations” to adapt their Shakespeare productions. Moreover, SbtS has been performing The Taming of the Shrew since 1999, well before Coallier registered his copyright. But Coallier’s claim had nevertheless succeeded in getting YouTube to remove the videos of the SbtS performances.

The DMCA takedown process allows copyright owners to request removal from online platforms of material they claim infringes their copyright. It was designed to protect legitimate intellectual property rights, not to block access to public domain works like Shakespeare plays. Under Section 512(f) of the DMCA, people who knowingly misrepresent reports can be subject to damages.

When YouTube told John Underwood about Coallier’s takedown notice, Underwood submitted a DMCA counter notice challenging the validity of Coallier’s requests. But YouTube ignored that counter notice. Instead of looking closely at Coallier’s meritless copyright claim and following the DMCA procedures to restore the video, YouTube told Underwood to negotiate with Coallier directly.

Hoping to learn more about Coallier’s claims, Underwood and one of his colleagues reached out via email. Coallier declined several requests to explain how the video copied his supposed “translations” of Shakespeare plays. Instead, he contended that “any claim Shakespeare is public domain is false as fact.” Coallier also directed Underwood to his website (WilliamShakespearePlayWright.com), where he is selling “playright[sic]” licenses for upwards of $249.99 Canadian, along with a 5% royalty on all ticket sales. If professional or festival organizations— like those in Underwood’s videos — wanted to perform Shakespeare, the licensing price would jump to at least $574.99.

Coallier’s claim is an abuse of the DMCA and an attempt to profit off of the public domain. His bogus demands demonstrate the importance of maintaining guardrails for the copyright takedown system. Underwood was only able to get YouTube to restore his videos after he retained legal counsel. But many creators—amateurs and hobbyists— do not have the same resources or avenues for recourse.

In addition, the lawsuit also asks the court to refer this matter to the United States Copyright Office to reconsider the validity of Coallier’s registration. Coallier deposited only two “translated” plays out of his purported collection of 37 plays to the copyright office, violating the legal deposit requirements for copyright.

The complaint aims to curb Coallier’s flagrant abuse of the DMCA copyright takedown system. Some of the other creators that had their Shakespeare-related content removed by Coallier’s takedowns have not been as successful in getting their works restored as Underwood. In the broader context, this case should send a message to other individuals who seek to take improper advantage of the copyright takedown system.

The lawsuit also should encourage YouTube to review takedown notices more carefully and more faithfully follow the DMCA counter-notice and replacement procedures, which do not always properly protect the rights of the posters of legitimate and non-infringing content. This system has been difficult for many content creators, especially those who cannot afford legal representation to challenge takedown notices.