Archive for the ‘Copyright’ Category

Tweets – Decisions Released on January 29, 2010

Friday, February 5th, 2010

Copyright
First Circuit
Latin American Music Company v. ASCAP
2008-1498
USDC Puerto Rico

Was the jury properly instructed at trial regarding the manner by which a purported exclusive copyright license, which did not specify a date or otherwise provide for termination, could be effectively terminated where the sole evidence in support of termination had comprised videotaped testimony from an officer of the licensor’s predecessor stating he had orally terminated the license during an executive conversation?

Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________

Tweets – Decisions Released on January 27, 2010

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

Copyright
First Circuit
Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Foundation, Inc. v. Büchel
2008-2199
USDC Massachusetts

Here, an artist only partly had completed a commissioned three-dimensional work, “Training Ground for Democracy,” which was to comprise a mock village enabling museum visitors to role-play social and political behaviors; consequently, the museum sought court order to display the unfinished artwork in public and it prevailed, and therefore questions pertaining to the Visual Artists Rights Act, 17 U.S.C. § 106A, were reviewed, specifically: (1) do an artist’s moral rights extend to incomplete creations, (2) does a right of integrity attach to such creations to bar distortions, mutilations or modifications prejudicial to the artist’s reputation or honor and, moreover, must prejudice be shown for both injunctive relief and damages purposes, and (3) does an artist hold the exclusive right to prepare works derivative of the creative elements actually finished where the artwork had been commissioned but not completed?

Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________

Tweets – Decisions Released on Dec. 8, 2009

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

Copyright Ownership
Fifth Circuit
Jordan v. Sony BMG Music Entertainment Inc.
2008-20835
USDC SD Texas

Was the district court correct to grant summary judgment dismissing a copyright co-ownership and infringement lawsuit in view of defendant’s recordation of a written transfer which had provided plaintiff with constructive notice as to defendant’s claim of sole ownership in the sound recordings “8 Rulez,” “Haters Still Mad,” and “We Ain’t Scared” despite plaintiff’s acknowledged contributions to the underlying musical compositions?

Download Stored Opinion

Tweets – Decisions Released on Nov. 30, 2009

Monday, November 30th, 2009

Copyright Infringement Settlement
Third Circuit
Ambrose v. Krause Publications, Inc.
2008-1513
USDC WD Pennsylvania

As a matter of law, where a copyright infringement settlement agreement expressly provided that plaintiff was not to sustain a separate but related copyright action against a third-party defendant if collection on that action might foreseeably lead to a claim for indemnification against the instant defendant, could the agreement be introduced to bar plaintiff from continuing the separate action once the third-party defendant had formally pursued indemnification by the instant defendant?

Download Stored Opinion

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

Copyright Infringement
Seventh Circuit
Schrock v. Learning Curve International, Inc.
2008-1296
USDC ND Illinois

On motion for summary judgment, was a professional photographer entitled to copyright his photos of defendants’ products and sue defendants on these derivative works for copyright infringement after the defendant product rightsholder and its licensee had continued to promote the photos in their advertising and on their product packages following termination of the photographer’s services for defendants, given Seventh Circuit jurisprudence under Gracen v. Bradford Exchange, 698 F.2d 300 (7th Cir. 1983)?

Download Stored Opinion

Derivative Works Displayed on Product Packaging
Derivative Works

Tweets-Decisions Released on November 4, 2009

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

Copyright Infringement
Sixth Circuit
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. UMG Recordings, Inc.
2007-5596
USDC MD Tennessee

Was fragmented literal similarity and thus copying determinable as a matter of law, and was a jury which had found willful copyright infringement and awarded statutory damages properly instructed regarding the questions of willfulness and the tributary fair use defense, where defendants merely had used the phrase “bow wow wow, yippie yo, yippie yea” as well as repeated the word “dog” in a low tone of voice at regular intervals along with the sound of rhythmic panting on defendants’ hip hop song “D.O.G. in Me” and these salient elements appear in plaintiffs’ original funk composition and recording musical work “Atomic Dog”?

Download Stored Opinion

Tweets – Decisions Released on October 21, 2009

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

Copyright
Sixth Circuit
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Universal-MCA Music Publishing, Inc.
2008-5254, 5255-73
USDC MD Tennessee

On second appeal, had the district court erred by denying the requests of defendant record and music publishing companies that attorney fees be imposed as a condition of granting plaintiffs’ motion to voluntarily dismiss without prejudice related copyright infringement cases pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2)?

Download Stored Opinion

Tweets – Decisions Released on August 24, 2009

Monday, August 24th, 2009

Asset Purchase Agreements
Copyright
Intellectual Property Licenses
Tenth Circuit
The SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc.
2008-4217
USDC Utah

What are the proper scopes of various intellectual property rights to UNIX and UNIXWare assets, including copyrights and licenses, purportedly transferred appurtenant to the sale of a rightsholder subject to a certain asset purchase agreement?

Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________

Tweets – Decisions Released on August 21, 2009

Friday, August 21st, 2009

Copyright
Second Circuit
Arista Records, LLC v. Launch Media, Inc.
2007-2576
USDC SD New York

As a matter of law, are internet radio webcasts “interactive service” within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. § 114(j)(7) insofar as these provide copyrighted sound recordings on request and programming specially created for users and thus webcasters are required to pay a licensing fee for each individual song instead of only a statutory licensing fee established by the Copyright Royalty Board?

Download Stored Opinion

Tweets – Decisions Released on August 5, 2009

Wednesday, August 5th, 2009

Copyright Infringement Venue
Ninth Circuit
Brayton Purcell, LLP v. Recordon & Recordon
2007-15383
USDC ND California

For purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a), does proper venue obtain in a forum where defendants are not subject to general personal jurisdiction and the sole question is one of specific personal jurisdiction, defendants allegedly published plaintiff’s website content verbatim on the defendants’ own website with the assistance of a Web developer, plaintiff discovered the alleged copying with the Copyscape tool, and defendants were sued for willful copyright infringement in plaintiff’s home forum? (J. Reinhardt dissent)

Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________