But only a single owner. That's important, and the title doesn't even hint at it.
tl;dr - Someone is suing someone else and issuing copyright takedowns to Linden Labs since they are hosting the content. Judge apparently didn't think they had much of a case and ordered Linden not to comply. Article thinks this is a violation of Linden's rights and should be allowed to take it down if they want.
Personally, I do see the rights issue. It could have been worded better, I think... At least given Linden the option to ignore it, instead of forcing them. But the judge is trying to protect the rights of the defendant, and said defendant would be losing money if Linden complied. (Linden loses money as well since it takes manpower to comply, but it also takes manpower to ignore the takedown request. If Linden has streamlined their takedown process, I think it unlikely they have a section for Judges' orders of negation.)
tl;dr - Someone is suing someone else and issuing copyright takedowns to Linden Labs since they are hosting the content. Judge apparently didn't think they had much of a case and ordered Linden not to comply. Article thinks this is a violation of Linden's rights and should be allowed to take it down if they want.
Personally, I do see the rights issue. It could have been worded better, I think... At least given Linden the option to ignore it, instead of forcing them. But the judge is trying to protect the rights of the defendant, and said defendant would be losing money if Linden complied. (Linden loses money as well since it takes manpower to comply, but it also takes manpower to ignore the takedown request. If Linden has streamlined their takedown process, I think it unlikely they have a section for Judges' orders of negation.)