https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71081113/helping-hands-for-dignity-coalition-a-colorado-non-profit-corporation-v/
Monday continued the recent trend of the filing of yet another copyright related lawsuit as YouTuber Anthony “BlackHartKnight” Gurka is being sued by the Helping Hands for Dignity Coalition, a Colorado non-profit corporation headed by Regan Benson.
As expected, Benson’s organization is represented by that Randall S. “The Unhinged Attorney” Newman, Esq., who has made himself the centerpiece of the latest wave of on-going lawsuits by first amendment auditors and cop watchers against those that they say have violated the copyright on their YouTube material.
The new lawsuit contends that Gurka is guilty of misusing YouTube’s counter-notice process under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), by using an overbroad definition of “fair use” that poses to “render copyright protection on YouTube meaningless.”
According to the suit, Benson issued two DMCA takedown notices of videos Gurka produced in 2022 and 2023 that she says violated the “fair use” exemption of the DMCA. While not legally binding, the “fair use” exemption gives creators the ability to use originally copyrighted material for transformative or review purposes.
In her filings, the Colorado based YouTuber, performance artist and advocate for the homeless included detailed breakdowns and timestamps of the usage of her content, and alleges that Gurka did not use her material in a transformative manner nor did he provide commentary on the material.
Instead, Benson alleges that Gorka provided “narration, insults, and superficial asides, offering no substantive critique or analysis.”
Gurka allegedly filed two identical DMCA counterclaims that simply read:
“The video should be reinstated because it falls under The Fair Use Doctrine. Furthermore, YouTube cannot determine what is Fair Use and what is not, only a duly appointed Judge can make that determination. In accordance with The Fair Use Doctrine, YouTube creators are legally permitted to create this type of video. Moreover, the YouTube Channel “BlackHartKnight”, is a commentary channel, providing satirical reviews of videos by 1st Amendment auditors as well as others, adding voice commentary, memes and sound effects to completely transform the original work into a Fair Use Video.
Consequently, the video in question, falls under Fair Use due to use of criticism, review, caricature, satire and parody. In addition, the original content was transformed into a unique work, not to be confused with the original video. As a result of this false copyright claim, it appears the only way to settle this matter is in a court of law, to litigate the erroneous charge lodged by the claimant. Please forward this counter notification to the claimant so he may take the appropriate action. Thank you.
I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief the material was removed due to a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.”
Benson’s complaint further states that the “Counter-Notices were part of a coordinated scheme to preserve monetized infringing content. Gurka submitted the false Counter-Notices under penalty of perjury as required by 17 U.S.C. § 512(g).”
The lawsuit asserts that because Gurka essentially misrepresented his position in the counterclaims, Benson was forced to initiate legal action for prevent the reinstatement of the videos in question from Gurka’s channel.
Benson is seeking monetary damages, declaratory judgment and a permanent injunction preventing Gurka from restoring the videos.
Attorney Newman was quick to provide his thoughts on the lawsuit to ReallyCoolNews, stating: “This isn’t complicated — you don’t get to upload someone else’s entire video, slap on a two-sentence ‘fair use’ declaration, and think the law magically blesses it. The DMCA doesn’t work that way, and neither do federal courts. The Helping Hands v. BlackHartKnight case is about holding people accountable when they abuse the counter-notice process to keep infringing content online. If that makes some YouTube trolls nervous, good — it means the statute is doing its job. And honestly, I’m hoping Patrick ‘Duh’ Arcy jumps in to represent them — nothing would make me happier than getting him riled up on a daily basis.”
This is a breaking news story.
Share this:
- Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
- Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
- Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
- Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky






LOL
yet another threat of legal suit. But no case is involved.
DL answer is perfectly fine.
So goeth count one
Count two… might not be dismissable on its face. The judge might want to watch the videos in question but…
Discovery.
Here is where the real fun begins
Pause here for a second. A lawyer just filing paperwork, as is the case here, does not know his client and does not know anything about them. Simply put, what the lawyer does not know, is going to bite him badly.
In order to sue as a non-profit corporation, you have to show who you are.
Makes sense?
You go to a court, they want to know who you are. Such as name, address that sort of normal thing.
Right?
Nothing alarming about that. right?
except…
Benson has all sorts of problems with it.
So when BK lawyer starts asking questions about the status and legality of the NPC and how up to date her paperwork is. Such as tax filing and other essential information, she is going to freak out.
😀
And when she refuses to hand over all that normal information telling the court who is suing whom, the court is going to make a negative inference about why she is not disclosing this information.
Now, just imagine you sue someone, only you refuse to say your name. The court is going to go, no and toss the case until you disclose such basic information. Since Regan will go all banshi on these questions, the court is not going to tolerate her antics.
Now, if she had just sued under her own name, none of this would be in issue. But then a lawyer would have to know his client before filing suit.
Since she has her channel register to the NPC, there was no other way to proceed except there always is… you just have to be aware of who your client is…
FAFO
Just to answer some questions
Registering a work creates a public record of the copyright claim. If registration is completed before an infringement occurs or within three months of publication, a copyright owner can sue for statutory damages and attorney’s fees, which are otherwise not available. Registration is a prerequisite for filing an infringement lawsuit in federal court for works of U.S. origin.
https://legalclarity.org/when-does-copyright-protection-start/
sorry for spamming here but your YT channel and YT in general does not like my comments on your video… was it something i said? 😀
In any case thanks for letting me exercise my 1st amendment 😀