278 results for 'cat:"Copyright"'.
J. Leinenweber grants a veterinary clinic’s motion to dismiss a fertility clinic’s copyright claims, finding the fertility clinic has failed to show that consumers would likely confuse its trademarked PROOV ovulation testing device with the veterinary clinic’s OvuPROOF ovulation testing device. The court also dismisses the veterinary clinic’s counterclaim for defamation, but allows its counterclaims for defamation and misrepresentation to proceed.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Leinenweber, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv3854, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Defamation, Technology
J. Brennan denies the graphic designer's motion to amend her complaint, ruling she not only failed to comply with the court's deadline for such a motion, but also fails to show good cause why the deadline should be extended, other than the candy company's alleged failure to timely provide discovery responses, which she could have addressed sooner and with motions to compel.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Brennan, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2305, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, copyright, Discovery
J. Reidinger requests the Ministry of Justice’s assistance, under the Hague Convention, in acquiring testimony for an upcoming copyright infringement suit brought by a tech security company against a similar firm. The firm began using the company’s intellectual property outside of the parties’ contractual relationship, and the request is for oral testimony by a relevant party living in The Netherlands.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv67, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, International Law, Contract
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. Bacharach answers a question in the negative regarding how to judge products that claim to be "American-made" for advertising purposes. The question comes from a dispute between two construction equipment providers in which one accused the other of lying for using that phrase, with the core of the question being if it is considered a false statement to call something "American-made" if that product was made using parts from other countries. The claim "American-made" is inherently ambiguous. Terms like "make" or "made" can refer to several elements of a product, including where it was physically assembled and where it originally came from, and as a result, it would be unreasonable to hold one of the construction equipment makers liable for statements such as those.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Bacharach, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 23-5046, Categories: copyright, False Advertising
J. Foster grants the pornographer's motions to serve third-party subpoenas seeking information on various unknown internet users in 12 cases alleging that the users unlawfully downloaded and distributed its copyrighted movies. Expedited discovery is warranted because the requests are specific in that they seek only the users' names and addresses, the pornographer has stated an actionable claim, there are no other ways to obtain this information, the case cannot proceed without it, and appropriate guardrails can be, and hereby are, put in place to protect the users' privacy.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Foster, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 0:24cv1060, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Privacy, Discovery
J. Cooper denies the travel company's motion to dismiss the photographer's suit alleging that it copied and shared her videos and photographs from her Instagram account without her permission, and grants the photographer's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint. The photographer's proposed third amended complaint cures the pleading defects the travel company points out in its motion to dismiss, namely a lack of specificity in the dates of alleged infringement, and, accepting as true her claimed dates of discovery of the infringement, her claims are not time-barred. Instagram's policies also did not unambiguously grant the travel company the right to share the photographer's copyrighted works.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Cooper, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1528, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, copyright
J. Mathis finds the district court properly granted an injection molding company’s motion for summary judgment in this copyright dispute regarding an industrial control system and software code brought by a consulting company. The consulting company argues that this court lacked jurisdiction, the district court should have not excluded an expert witness and erred on granting summary judgment in favor of the injection molding company. The expert testimony was not disposed by the injection molding company before the discovery period had closed and would have caused a surprise disruption of the trial. The consulting company fails to show a dispute of fact about the software code protectability. Therefore, this court does vacate the prior appeal decision and denies the motion to supplement the appellate record. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Mathis, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: 23-1591, Categories: copyright, Jurisdiction, Experts
J. Baker recommends granting default judgment to a photographer and awarding him $15,000 in damages on his copyright claim against a night club that unlawfully used his photo of an Army captain in doctor’s clothes to advertise its “Medic Strippers” event. The club failed to timely respond to the action and the photographer makes sufficient allegations to support his claims.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Baker, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv565, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Evidence
J. Caproni finds for the news outlets in a copyright suit filed by a photographer over an Instagram post that featured a photograph of the case of Friends. A copyrighted photograph included in a social media post is transformative when the purpose is to report of comment on the post. Therefore, the news outlet's publication of the photo constituted fair use.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Caproni, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1492, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright
J. King grants the pet products company an injunction regarding its complaint that the store is manufacturing and selling products, including a pet hair remover, that infringe on the pet products company's patent. The pet products company shows that the store infringed on its copyright, and evidence shows that an injunction serves in the public interest as opposed to harming the public interest.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: King, Filed On: March 31, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1768, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Patent, Injunction
J. Irizarry dismisses all federal copyright infringement claims against a group of audio book streaming services, including Amazon-owned Audible, over the rights to stream audio books based on the writings of Teri Woods, an acclaimed urban fiction writer. The court finds the streaming services were granted full rights to distribute the works on their respective platforms.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Irizarry, Filed On: March 30, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv507, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Technology
J. Blakey partially grants the sued software development company’s motion to dismiss the suing software development firm’s copyright infringement, trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract claims. The suing firm claims one of its former employees used his knowledge of its programs to develop an almost identical research software to the one it markets, and launched the software with his competing company. The court dismisses the suing firm’s confidentiality and non-competition agreement breach claim, but allows all its other allegations to go forward.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Blakey, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv676, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: copyright, Trade Secrets, Technology
J. Bastian denies the publisher's motion to dismiss the professional photographer's complaint that the publisher used a copyrighted photograph of Kris Kristofferson on its website without permission. Although the photo went live on the website on Feb. 14, 2019, and the photographer first saw the copyright infringement during the same year, the applicable statute of limitations that bars copyright infringement discovered before 2020 does not apply because there was no reasonable way for the photographer to find the photo due to the lack of "storm warnings" alerting the photographer of the publisher's infringement. The publisher is based in the Pacific Northwest while the photographer is based in Kentucky, and the internet is so vast that it would take a long time to monitor the usage of a single image.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Bastian, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv25, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright
J. Snyder grants a photographer's motion for default judgment in a copyright infringement dispute with a real estate services company. The photographer alleges that the company used one of her photos without permission and without credit. The photographer sent a cease and desist letter, but the company did not respond. The photographer has sufficiently alleged copyright infringement. The photographer is awarded $22,000 in statutory damages and $1512 in costs.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Snyder, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv5528, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Damages
J. Engelmayer finds for Warner Bros. on all claims brought by a freelance comic book artist claiming the movie studio lifted elements of a 1990 story he wrote about Batman to use in its 2022 film The Batman. The similarities between the two stories are based on common, even hackneyed, archetypes and plot features that are not protected by copyright. In addition, all copyright claims against DC Comics shall be dismissed except the artist's claim of copyright fraud. DC Comics has established that it is the owner of valid copyrights of Batman works.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Engelmayer, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv8969, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright
J. Altman grants the photograph owner's motion for default final judgment against a site which republished its photo of actor Jim Carrey without permission. The site is enjoined from continuing to store or display the photo, and the owner is entitled to judgment in the amount of $12,575 and attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $8,061.75.
Court: USDC Southern District of Florida, Judge: Altman, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv23601, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Attorney Fees
J. Snyder denies a hotel's motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding a contract dispute with an architectural firm and denies in part its motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding the architectural firm's copyright infringement claim stemming from a contract to provide architectural design services for a new hotel. The firm alleges that its architectural designs were used without permission or payment. The firm has "adequately pled its claim for copyright infringement at this stage by alleging its ownership of the drawings and plans, its registration of the copyright, and the infringement" by the hotel.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Snyder, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 8:22cv459, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: copyright, Contract
J. Pacold grants an American telecommunication company’s motion to open contempt proceedings on the Chinese telecommunications firm it is suing. The court opens contempt proceedings over the Chinese firm’s refusal to pay the American company royalties on a series of radios. The Chinese firm rejects the claim that its radios violate any trade secrets or copyrights of the American company. A jury concluded it had infringed on other copyrights held by the American company in a 3.5-month trial that concluded in February 2020, but that trial didn’t cover the radio products at issue here. The same jury ordered the Chinese firm to pay the American company over $543 million in royalties. While contempt proceedings are open, the court also forbids the Chinese company from pursuing a separate litigation against the American company in China in order to “protect [its] jurisdiction.”
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Pacold, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 1:17cv1973, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: copyright, International Law, Technology