5th Circuit rules ISP should have terminated Internet users accused of piracy; Ars Technica, October 11, 2024

 JON BRODKIN, Ars Technica; 5th Circuit rules ISP should have terminated Internet users accused of piracy

"Music publishing companies notched another court victory against a broadband provider that refused to terminate the accounts of Internet users accused of piracy. In a ruling on Wednesday, the conservative-leaning US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit sided with the big three record labels against Grande Communications, a subsidiary of Astound Broadband.

The appeals court ordered a new trial on damages because it said the $46.8 million award was too high, but affirmed the lower court's finding that Grande is liable for contributory copyright infringement."

Supreme Court to Clarify Copyright Infringement Limits in Case Against Warner Music; The Hollywood Reporter, September 29, 2023

Winston Cho, The Hollywood Reporter; Supreme Court to Clarify Copyright Infringement Limits in Case Against Warner Music

"The Supreme Court will clear up how far back copyright holders can recover damages for infringement in a case involving a Florida producer who sued Warner Chappell Music after Flo Rida sampled a song he owns.

The justices agreed on Friday to review an appeal from Warner Music and Artist Publishing Group of a lower court’s ruling that recovery for damages that occurred prior to the three-year window to sue is allowed. The decision may clarify uncertainty over whether there is truly open-ended copyright liability, as two federal appeals courts have recently held."

A Photographer Tried to Get His Photos Removed from an AI Dataset. He Got an Invoice Instead.; Vice, April 28, 2023

Chloe Xiang, Vice ; A Photographer Tried to Get His Photos Removed from an AI Dataset. He Got an Invoice Instead.

"The legality of using copyrighted material to train AI is still very contentious and there has not yet been a precedent case that can be used to determine the validity of either side of the case."

Guns N' Roses sue online Texas gun and flower shop for trademark infringement; Entertainment Weekly, December 5, 2022

Jessica Wang, Entertainment Weekly; Guns N' Roses sue online Texas gun and flower shop for trademark infringement

"An online gun and floral shop in Texas might soon be knockin' on a courtroom door over a trademark infringement lawsuit filed on behalf of Guns N' Roses.

The rock band comprised of Axl Rose, Saul "Slash" Hudson, and Michael "Duff" McKagan filed a lawsuit Thursday against Jersey Village Florist, which operates the online shop Texas Guns and Roses, for wholesale appropriation and infringement of the Guns N' Roses name without the band's approval, license, or consent.

In the complaint obtained by EW, the band argues that the store's name is "likely to cause confusion" with the Guns N' Roses mark. It also, per the suit, "falsely suggested a connection" with the band that could "dilute" the name. The online shop has capitalized on the band's "goodwill, prestige, and fame" without permission, Guns N' Roses alleges, which has been "particularly damaging" given the nature of the business."

Jury orders Steve King's campaign to pay $750 for using copyrighted meme; Des Moines Register, November 18, 2022

 William Morris, Des Moines Register; 

Jury orders Steve King's campaign to pay $750 for using copyrighted meme

"King's campaign used Sam's photo, superimposed over a background of the U.S. Capitol, in a Facebook post in January 2020 urging supporters to "Fund our memes!!!" Laney Griner, who copyrighted the photo in 2012, sent a cease-and-desist letter soon after, and, in December 2020, sued King and his campaign for copyright infringement and invasion of privacy against Sam, now a teen...

The jury agreed that King's campaign violated the copyright and awarded $750 in damages, the minimum allowed by statute. But it did not find that King, who denied knowledge of the meme before it was posted, had personally violated the copyright. Jurors also found neither campaign nor candidate had invaded Sam Griner's privacy with the Facebook post...

Although used freely as a meme online, the photo also has commercial value. The Griners have licensed its use in ad campaigns and objected to King's unauthorized use of it for fundraising purposes, according to the complaint."

Who Owns the Copyright in A Tattoo?; Lexology, October 17, 2022

McKee Voorhees & Sease PLC - Brandon W. Clark, Lexology; Who Owns the Copyright in A Tattoo?

"In this, the first ever case of its kind to reach a jury, the jury found in favor of Alexander. However, the decision was something of a hollow victory for Alexander as the jury only awarded damages of $3,750. This case illustrates many of the issues with putting a copyright case in front of a jury as the court removed many of Take Two’s potential defenses from the jury’s consideration including de minimus use, an implied license, and waiver.

While the issues are novel and some of the case specific facts are fascinating, the outcome of the case could have a significant impact on copyrights and licensing for video games, television, motion pictures, and photographs. It is too early to tell what specific impact the result could have, and the minimal damages award will likely prevent an onslaught of similar cases, but the result does indicate a potential increase in risk when using someone’s name, image, and likeness, and will likely change the way these licenses are drafted in the future.

From a practical perspective, since copyright rights can only be transferred via a signed writing, the one sure way to avoid this risk is to ensure that tattoo artists sign a copyright assignment at the time the work is completed."

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement; CNN, January 5, 2022

Niamh Kennedy, CNN; Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement

"The court found ANL infringed Meghan's copyright by publishing extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in The Mail on Sunday newspaper and Mail Online website during hearings in January and May last year, the court order says.

The group is also set to pay the duchess £1 in nominal damages for misuse of private information, according to the court order.

On December 2, the Court of Appeal upheld a ruling that ANL had misused Meghan's private information through their publication of the letter, saying the Duchess had "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the letter.""

The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage; Slate, May 7, 2020

Joshua Lamel, Slate; The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage

"Copyright is the perfect vehicle for SLAPP suits. First of all, copyright is a government-granted, exclusive right to speech. There is no better way to prevent someone from publicly criticizing you than to use copyright law. Copyright lawsuits are expensive and place enormous costs on defendants. Fair use has to be raised once you are sued, so defendants will likely have to spend more. The potential damages are extreme: For every violation of a copyright, you can get $150,000 in statutory damages. Additionally, copyright law has injunctive relief—you can actually stop the speech from happening.

One would think that Congress would recognize this and specifically include copyright in federal anti-SLAPP efforts. But that is not happening anytime soon. Instead, thanks to their lobbying and fundraising, copyright holders have been successful in convincing senior members of Congress in both parties to exclude copyright. These members have told federal anti-SLAPP advocates that they need to be willing to give up copyright for a chance of being successful. There is not a single good policy argument to exclude copyright. Copyright litigation abuse is exactly what anti-SLAPP legislation should be designed to prevent. This type of abuse is the reason we need a federal fix.

In my dream world, the saturation of Joe Exotic’s story will help everyday Americans understand the relevance of copyright law in our daily lives—maybe even spur federal lawmakers to introduce and pass anti-SLAPP law without a special carve-out for copyright."

CalTech wins $1.1 billion jury verdict in patent case against Apple, Broadcom; Reuters, January 29, 2020

Jan Wolfe, Stephen Nellis, Reuters; CalTech wins $1.1 billion jury verdict in patent case against Apple, Broadcom

"The California Institute of Technology said on Wednesday that it won a $1.1 billion jury verdict in a patent case against Apple (AAPL.O) and Broadcom (AVGO.O). 

In a case filed in federal court in Los Angeles in 2016, the Pasadena, California-based research university alleged that Broadcom wi-fi chips used in hundreds of millions of Apple iPhones infringed patents relating to data transmission technology."

Judge Lets NMPA Double Damages to $300M in Peloton Copyright Suit; Billboard, September 28, 2019

Tatiana Cirisano, Billboard; Judge Lets NMPA Double Damages to $300M in Peloton Copyright Suit

"A Manhattan federal judge has approved the National Music Publishers' Association's (NMPA) request to double damages to $300 million in a lawsuit against Peloton, for the exercise startup's alleged use of more than 2,000 songs in its workout videos without the proper licenses."

Two skyline photo cases, two different results; Lexology, August 9, 2018

Thompson Coburn LLP - Mark Sableman, 

Lexology; Two skyline photo cases, two different results

"Two cases involving photographs of city skylines illustrate what is, and isn’t, copyright infringement."

Judge Orders Chinese Wind-Turbine Maker To Pay $59 Million For Stealing Trade Secrets; NPR, July 6, 2018

Jim Zarroli, NPR; Judge Orders Chinese Wind-Turbine Maker To Pay $59 Million For Stealing Trade Secrets

"A federal judge has ordered China's largest wind-turbine firm, Sinovel, to pay $59 million for stealing trade secrets from a Massachusetts-based technology company.

Last January, Sinovel was found guilty of stealing trade secrets in federal criminal court in Madison, Wis. The company paid an Austria-based employee of American Superconductor Corp. to steal its source code for software that powered wind turbines.

This kind of intellectual property theft has been highlighted by the Trump administration as a reason for levying 25 percent tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese goods entering the U.S., which began on Friday. China retaliated with tariffs on $34 billion worth of U.S. goods."

Former law student obtains $6.45M judgment in revenge porn case; ABA Journal, April 11, 2018

Debra Cassens Weiss, ABA Journal; Former law student obtains $6.45M judgment in revenge porn case

"A former law student in California has obtained a $6.45 million default judgment against a former boyfriend accused of posting her intimate photos after their breakup.

The woman, identified as “Jane Doe” in the case, was awarded $3 million in compensatory damages, $3 million in punitive damages and $450,000 for copyright infringement, report Law360 and CNN...

Besides infringement, the suit had alleged infliction of emotional distress, cyberstalking, and online impersonation with intent to cause harm.

Doe was represented by lawyers from K&L Gates’ Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project, a team of pro bono lawyers representing “revenge porn” victims. The award is the second-largest in a revenge porn case that doesn’t involve a celebrity, according to the law firm. The highest award, $8.9 million, was also obtained with the help of the project."

Google loses Android battle and could owe Oracle billions of dollars; CNN Money, March 27, 2018

Danielle Wiener-Bronner, CNN Money; Google loses Android battle and could owe Oracle billions of dollars

"Google isn't the only company that stands to lose from this decision. Many others rely on open-source software to develop their own platforms. Tuesday's ruling means that some will either have pay to license certain software or develop their own from scratch.

"The decision is going to create a significant shift in how software is developed worldwide," Carani said. "It really means that copyright in this context has teeth."

"Sometimes free is not really free," he added."

Merck Falls After $2.54 Billion Gilead Verdict Is Tossed; Bloomberg, February 20, 2018

Susan Decker and Christopher Yasiejko, Bloomberg; Merck Falls After $2.54 Billion Gilead Verdict Is Tossed

"Merck & Co. fell after a federal judge tossed a record $2.54 billion verdict it had won against Gilead Sciences Inc. over a hepatitis treatment.

A federal jury in 2016 had said that Gilead owed Merck 10 percent of the sales of its Sovaldi and Harvoni hepatitis C drugs. District Court Judge Leonard Stark in Wilmington, Delaware, agreed Friday with Gilead’s argument that the Merck patent was invalid...

The verdict was the largest patent-infringement verdict in U.S. history, dwarfing the next biggest, a $1.67 billion verdict won by Johnson & Johnson against Abbott Laboratories that was later thrown out on appeal, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

The case is Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Gilead Sciences Inc., 14-846, U.S. District Court, District of Delaware (Wilmington)."

ASCAP sues Peninsula bar for copyright infringement; Peninsula Daily News, February 18, 2018

Paul Gottlieb, Peninsula Daily News; ASCAP sues Peninsula bar for copyright infringement

"The lawsuit seeks damages, as outlined in the Copyright Act for infringement actions, of between $750 and $30,000 for the unlicensed, unpermitted performance of each of four songs, or $3,000 to $120,000 in total damages, along with court costs and attorney’s fees.

ASCAP alleges the songs were played on April 19, 2017, during what Wagener said were karaoke performances. A person from a private investigative firm who was at the bar documented The Dam Bar patrons singing the songs, Wagener said."

New Balance wins record China trademark award; BBC, August 24, 2017

BBC; New Balance wins record China trademark award

"A Chinese court awarded the US sportswear firm more than 10 million yuan (£1.2m; $1.5m).

Lawyers believe it to be the highest award to a foreign company in a trademark dispute in China.

The country has been tightening its laws to tackle the widespread problem of trademark abuse."

Apple ordered to pay $506 million to university in patent dispute; Reuters, July 25, 2017

Jan Wolfe, Reuters; Apple ordered to pay $506 million to university in patent dispute

"A U.S. judge on Monday ordered Apple Inc to pay $506 million for infringing on a patent owned by the University of Wisconsin-Madison's patent licensing arm, more than doubling the damages initially imposed on Apple by a jury.

U.S. District Judge William Conley in Madison added $272 million to a $234 million jury verdict the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation won against Apple in October 2015. Conley said WARF is owed additional damages plus interest because Apple continued to infringe the patent, which relates to computer processor technology, until it expired in December 2016."

Supreme Court turns down EFF’s “Dancing Baby” fair use case; Ars Technica, June 19, 2017

Joe Mullin, Ars Technica, Supreme Court turns down EFF’s “Dancing Baby” fair use case

"The Supreme Court has decided not to take up the case of Lenz v. Universal, a ten-year-old copyright lawsuit initiated by the Electronic Frontier Foundation that helped determine the boundaries of "fair use."

Today's order leaves standing an earlier ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. EFF called that ruling a "strong precedent," while at the same time acknowledging it did not go far enough...

Now that the 9th Circuit precedent stands, EFF will have to decide whether or not it wants to push forward with a jury trial. The damages boundaries have already been set by earlier judicial decisions, so Lenz wouldn't be able to get more than "nominal" damages. That wouldn't be much, since her video was removed for only a couple weeks and has remained up since, garnering more than 1.9 million views.

EFF Legal Director Corynne McSherry said she's disappointed the Supreme Court didn't take the case, since DMCA abuse is "well-documented and all too common."...

At the end of the day, the Lenz case is a clear demonstration that Section 512(f) of the DMCA, which allows for lawsuits and damages against copyright owners, is unlikely to ever be a powerful tool. From a user's perspective, it's hard to imagine what could be a more clear case of fair use than the Lenz video, which features less than 40 seconds of staticky-sounding background music. If copyright owners can say they satisfied the legal requirement by saying, "We considered fair use, but didn't see it," then not much can stop them from basically blowing off 512(f). Few future plaintiffs will be able to summon the legal resources that Lenz did."

Disney Wins ‘Cars’ Copyright Case in China; Variety, 12/30/16

Patrick Frater, Variety; 

Disney Wins ‘Cars’ Copyright Case in China:

"A Shanghai court has awarded damages to Disney and Pixar Animation in a copyright case over a Chinese-made film called “The Autobots.” The court ruled that the film was an illegal copy of Disney’s “Cars.”

The court said that the Chinese producer Bluemtv and distributor G-Point had been fined some $190,000 (RMB1.35 million) and ordered to cease their copyright infringement. “The Autobots” film was released in July 2015, and grossed some $863,000 (RMB6 million.)"