XML 33 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.1

CONTINGENCIES | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
CONTINGENCIES | CONTINGENCIES In the ordinary course of business, Vimeo is, and from time to time may become, a party to various legal proceedings. Vimeo establishes reserves for specific legal matters when it determines that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the loss is reasonably estimable. Management has also identified certain other legal matters where it believes an unfavorable outcome is not probable and, therefore, no reserve is established. Although management currently believes that resolving claims against Vimeo, including claims where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible, will not have a material impact on the liquidity, results of operations or financial condition of Vimeo, these matters are subject to inherent uncertainties and management's view of these matters may change in the future. Vimeo also evaluates other contingent matters, including income and non-income tax contingencies, to assess the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome and estimated extent of potential loss. It is possible that an unfavorable outcome of one or more of these lawsuits or other contingencies could have a material impact on the liquidity, results of operations or financial condition of Vimeo. See "Note 3—Income Taxes" for additional information related to income tax contingencies. EMI/Capitol Records Copyright Infringement Litigation In December 2009, a group of music publishers owned by EMI Music Publishing (now owned by Sony/ATV Music Publishing, a subsidiary of Sony Entertainment) and a group of then EMI-affiliated record companies, including Capitol Records (now owned by Universal Music Group), filed two lawsuits against Vimeo and its former owner, Connected Ventures, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. See Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, LLC, No. 09 Civ. 10101 (S.D.N.Y.) and EMI Blackwood Music, Inc. v. Vimeo, LLC, No. 09 Civ. 10105 (S.D.N.Y.). In both cases, plaintiffs allege that Vimeo infringed their music copyrights (in the publishers' musical compositions and the record companies' sound recordings) by hosting and streaming videos uploaded by users (and in certain cases, former employees) featuring their musical works. Plaintiffs seek, among other things, injunctive relief and monetary damages. The initial complaints identified 199 videos as infringing (which Vimeo removed post-suit). Prior to suit, plaintiffs did not avail themselves of their right to submit a takedown notice to Vimeo pursuant to the online safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 ("DMCA"), which limits the liability of online service providers for copyright infringement of their users when the provider takes certain measures. Vimeo asserts that the DMCA limits its liability because it complies with the DMCA and plaintiffs failed to submit takedown notices. Plaintiffs disagree, asserting various theories as to why the DMCA may not apply to some or all of the videos-in-suit. The district court bifurcated proceedings and required the parties to first litigate the issue of whether Vimeo satisfied the DMCA's safe harbor provisions. On September 18, 2013, the district court granted partial summary judgment to Vimeo on 144 of the 199 original videos-in-suit on the ground that Vimeo complied with the threshold requirements of the DMCA and that there was no evidence that a Vimeo employee had watched the videos in question such that Vimeo had actual or "red flag" knowledge of infringement, which would disqualify the DMCA's application. The court denied summary judgment as to 35 videos-in-suit on the ground that there was a material question of fact as to whether Vimeo had "red flag" knowledge of infringement based upon employees having watched all or part of these videos. The court further held that the DMCA did not apply to the record companies' state-law claims regarding sound recordings fixed before February 1972; a trial was necessary to determine whether Vimeo was liable for employees who uploaded approximately 20 videos; and that plaintiffs should be permitted to amend their complaints to add over 1,500 videos allegedly infringing their copyrights (which Vimeo removed after receiving plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint). Vimeo sought and obtained the right to appeal certain issues on an interlocutory basis to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On June 16, 2016, the Second Circuit held that (1) the district court had applied the incorrect summary-judgment standard for "red flag" infringement and that evidence that an employee watched all or part of a video containing plaintiffs' music did not raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether Vimeo had "red flag" knowledge in such video; (2) the DMCA applies to state-law copyright infringement claims predicated on pre-1972 sound recordings; and (3) on an issue raised by plaintiffs in their cross-appeal, the record did not show that Vimeo was willfully blind towards infringing activity taking place on its platform. As a result of these rulings, the Second Circuit partially vacated the district court's ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its judgment. On March 31, 2018, the district court granted Vimeo’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs' state-law unfair competition claims on the grounds that they were state-law copyright claims covered by the DMCA per the Second Circuit's judgment. On May 28, 2021, the district court granted Vimeo summary judgment as to videos for which the sole remaining basis of liability was the assertion that Vimeo had "red flag" knowledge of infringement. On August 26, 2021, the district court approved a stipulation whereby plaintiffs agreed to conditionally dismiss all remaining claims to allow a final judgment to issue. Under the stipulation, plaintiffs may refile their claims regarding the alleged employee-uploaded videos if the Second Circuit reverses the district court's other rulings in whole or in part. On November 1, 2021, the district court entered a final judgment adopting the terms of the parties' stipulation. On November 29, 2021, plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On January 13, 2025, the Second Circuit issued an opinion affirming the judgment. Plaintiffs filed a Petition for Panel Rehearing in the Second Circuit on February 26, 2025. RTI Copyright Litigation Between 2012 and 2017, Italian broadcaster Reti Televisive Italiane s.p.a. and an affiliate thereof (collectively, "RTI") filed four lawsuits for copyright infringement against Vimeo in the Civil Court of Rome. See Reti Televisive Italiane s.p.a. v. Vimeo, LLC, Cause Nos. 23732/12, 62343/2015, and 59780/2017 (Rome Civil Court), and Medusa Film v. Vimeo, Inc., Cause No. 74775/2017 (Rome Civil Court). In each case, RTI asserts that Vimeo infringed its copyrights by hosting and streaming user-uploaded videos that allegedly contain RTI's television or film programming, and seeks, among other things, injunctive relief and monetary damages. On January 15, 2019, the Civil Court of Rome concluded the first case (No. 23732/12) and entered a judgment against Vimeo, awarding RTI damages of €8,500,000 plus interest and entering an injunction against Vimeo with respect to further acts of infringement. Vimeo filed an appeal and petitioned to stay the judgment pending appeal. On May 13, 2019, the Rome Court of Appeals stayed the judgment pending appeal. On August 10, 2022, the Rome Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. Vimeo appealed to the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation. On June 2, 2019, the Civil Court of Rome concluded the second case (No. 62343/2015) and entered a judgment against Vimeo, awarding RTI damages of €4,746,273 plus interest and entering an injunction against Vimeo as to further acts infringement. Vimeo filed an appeal and petitioned to stay the judgment pending appeal. The Rome Court of Appeals declined to stay the judgment. On October 12, 2023, the Rome Court of Appeals published its decision affirming the lower court's judgment on liability but reducing the amount of damages to €3,865,161 plus interests and costs. Vimeo has appealed to the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation and the case is currently pending (No. 856/2024). To pursue enforcement of the judgments in the United States, RTI initially commenced a lawsuit against Vimeo in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on October 26, 2020 to enforce the June 2019 judgment. See Reti Televisive Italiane s.p.a. v. Vimeo, LLC, No. 20 Civ. 8954 (S.D.N.Y.). On December 22, 2020, Vimeo and RTI filed, and the district court entered, a stipulation and order staying the U.S. proceedings pending the final outcome of the appeals from the Italian judgment at issue. On June 1, 2023, RTI filed an action in the Supreme Court of New York, New York County to enforce the Civil Court's judgment of €8,500,000 (No. 652646/2023). The case was removed to federal court and is now pending in the Southern District of New York. See Reti Televisive Italiane S.p.A. v. Vimeo.com, Inc, No. 23 Civ. 05488 (S.D.N.Y.). On October 20, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order lifting the stay of the U.S. enforcement proceedings in the first case (No. 20 Civ. 8954) and consolidating the two enforcement proceedings (No. 20 Civ. 8954 and No. 23 Civ. 05488). Vimeo has filed a Motion for Summary Judgement or, in the Alternative, to Stay the Case. On April 7, 2023, the Civil Court of Rome published a decision finding in favor of Vimeo and dismissing the third case (No. 59780/2017) in its entirety. On October 9, 2023, RTI served Vimeo with its appeal challenging the court's decision in the third case. On October 18, 2022, the Civil Court of Rome issued a decision in the fourth case, Medusa Film v. Vimeo, Inc. (No. 74775/2017) finding liability but rejecting RTI's damage calculation and reserving judgment as to the amount of damages. On November 30, 2022, RTI served a notice of appeal challenging the court's decision on damages. On June 26, 2024, the parties entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the lawsuits pending in Italy and the consolidated enforcement action pending in New York. The settlement agreement included a payment to the plaintiffs, which did not have a material impact on Vimeo’s financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, on July 12, 2024, the parties filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal of the consolidated enforcement action in the Southern District of New York (No. 23 Civ. 05488), and the case is now closed. On July 18, 2024, the parties filed Joint Stipulations of Dismissal to resolve the cases pending in the Civil Court of Rome (No. 74775/2017), the Rome Court of Appeals (Nos. 6536/2022 and 5033/2023), and the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation (Nos. 26719/2022 and 856/2024). The Civil Court of Rome and the Rome Court of Appeals have dismissed the cases pending before them. The Italian Supreme Court of Cassation dismissed the first case (No. 26719/2022), and the second case (No. 856/2024) remains pending. Sony/Universal/Warner Copyright Litigation In March 2021, Sony Music Entertainment Italy (a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment Group), Warner Music Italia (a subsidiary of Warner Music Group), Universal Music Italia (a subsidiary of Universal Music Group), and Warner Music International Services (a subsidiary of Warner Music Group) filed a lawsuit against Vimeo in the Court of Milan alleging violations of Italian copyright and unfair competition laws. See Sony Music Entertainment Italy s.p.a. et al. v. Vimeo, Inc., Case No. 10977/2021 (Court of Milan, Business Division). The complaint alleges that Vimeo infringed plaintiffs' copyrights by hosting and streaming user-uploaded videos that contain plaintiffs' copyrighted works and that, upon notification of the alleged infringement, Vimeo employed a takedown process that did not comply with Italian law. The complaint seeks, among other things, injunctive relief and damages to be quantified in a separate proceeding. Additionally, the complaint seeks potential penalties of €10,000 per day of delay in removing unauthorized works after receipt of a court order to do so, if applicable. On November 3, 2021, Vimeo filed its initial brief. On November 23, 2021, the parties attended the initial hearing with the Court of Milan where the court set forth a briefing schedule. The claims hearing scheduled for October 16, 2024 has been rescheduled for October 8, 2025.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration