7 results for 'cat:"Communications" AND cat:"Copyright"'.
J. Seabright denies reconsideration and a motion to stay an order to quash issued against owners of a copyrighted film that subpoenaed the communications company for its subscribers’ information. The communications company merely assigning IP addresses to its users does not constitute a referral to copyrighted material nor does not preventing its routing or filtering equal transmitting the material. Because the communications company has previously worked with the owners and committed to preserving the information regardless of subpoenas or quashes, staying is not necessary.
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Seabright, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv426, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: communications, copyright, Evidence
J. Rushing finds the lower court improperly found the internet service provider liable for vicarious infringement. Top music companies sued the provider for its lack of action to prevent its subscribers from using its service to download music illegally. The provider did not profit from its subscribers’ acts of infringement, a legal prerequisite for vicarious liability. Reversed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Rushing, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 21-1168, Categories: communications, copyright, Jury
J. Wallace finds that the district court improperly dismissed companies' putative class action asserting California state-law claims arising from Google’s placement of search results on copies of their websites. The companies challenged the way Google displayed websites in Search App on Android phones, claiming that by displaying frame and half-page digests, Google occupied valuable space on the websites of class members that Google should have paid. The state-law claim is preempted by federal copyright law and the matter is remanded to the lower court with instruction to dismiss. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Wallace, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 22-15899, Categories: communications, copyright
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Failla denies the defendant television developer's motion to dismiss a copyright action stemming from its production of a police reality show called "On Patrol: Live," which the plaintiff developer claims is virtually identical to a show the parties collaborated on together called "Live PD" which was taken off the air after the death of George Floyd. The complaint plausibly alleges the two shows serve the same purpose, and there is unquestionably probable consumer confusion as shown by tweets showing viewer excitement that Live PD is back on the air.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Failla, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv7411, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: communications, copyright