Court filings made by Netflix on Monday at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals revealed that the streaming company is the latest entity that had freaked out at the shocking court decision in February, which deemed that "Innocence of Muslims" actress Cindy Lee Garcia can assert a copyright interest in her performance in the controversial film, and that Google needs to remove the anti-Islamic film from its YouTube video service, The Hollywood Reporter said.

In its amicus brief, Netflix wrote, "Can a bit-part actor in Gone With the Wind now seek an injunction... because he does not approve of the use of his performance in a piece of 'Yankee propaganda'? What about his heirs? And even if he signed some agreement in 1939 defining the scope of the license, what are the chances that the studio (to say nothing of Netflix) can lay its hands on it?"

THR said that Netflix and others service providers will err on the side of caution by removing creative works upon court order if Garcia's claims will be given legitimacy. Netflix added in its amicus brief that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals essentially create a new copyright species wherein even the bit performers of a creative project can have the legal avenue to pursue legal claims against downstream distributors on certain performances they do not approve. Moreover, Netflix argued that the 9th Circuit ruling also risks to wreck established copyright and business rules.

Aside from Netflix, news organizations like The Washington Post and National Public Radio presented an argument that the decision by the 9th Circuit could provide veto power over unflattering reports to subjects of news coverage.

The argument read, "If an actress reading a script authored by someone else is 'sufficiently creative to be protectable,' public officials could argue that they 'own' the copyright to their prepared remarks, or their extemporaneous responses to a videotaped interview."