Source: http://prototypedev.com/Gentry/antitrust-copyright-and-business-tort-basics-in-virginia/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 00:59:34+00:00

Document:
Every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce among the States is illegal. 15 U.S.C. Section 1.
See Levine v. McLeskey, 881 F. Supp. 1030, 1044 (E.D. Va. 1995); Estate Constr. Co. v. Miller & Smith Holding Co., 14 F. 3d 213, 220 (4th Cir. 1994).
Per se unreasonable restraints. Examples include: price fixing, group boycotts (concerted refusals to deal), and market allocation agreements among competitors.
Rule of reason (most cases)Evaluate the situation on a case-by-case basis and consider the impact of competition in the relevant market. See Berlyn, Inc. v. Gazette Newspapers, Inc., 157 F. Supp. 2d 609, 615-16 (D. Md. 2001).
Monopolizing or attempting to monopolize, or combining or conspiring to monopolize, any part of the trade or commerce among States is illegal. 15 U.S.C. Section 2. Monopoly power is the power to control prices or exclude competition. Price maker rather than price taker.
The defendant must possess monopoly power in the relevant market and must willfully acquire and maintain that power. See Levine v. McLeskey, 881 F. Supp. 1030, 1046 (E.D. Va. 1995).
Having a monopoly legitimately is not illegal. These monopolies are tolerated but not cherished by the antitrust laws.
Concerted action is not required, but two or more parties combining to monopolize is still a violation. William C. Holmes, Intellectual Property and Antitrust Law Sections 6.01, 6.03 (West 2004).
dangerous probability of successfully achieving monopoly power.
antitrust injury. See Virginia Vermiculite v. W.R. Grace & Co., 144 F. Supp. 2d 558, 590 (W.D. Va. 2001).
Predatory pricing. A competitor, particularly one with significant market power, cannot price its goods or services below cost in an effort to hurt competition.
Unlawful to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality where the effect of the discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or to create a monopoly. 15 U.S.C. Section 13(a).
Most services are not a “commodity” under federal law. See Berlyn, Inc. v. Gazette Newspapers, Inc., 157 F. Supp. 2d 609, 621 (D. Md. 2001).
Acquisitions that may substantially lessen competition or create a monopoly are prohibited. 15 U.S.C. Section 18.
Contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce of the Commonwealth is unlawful. Va. Code Section 59.1-95.
Conspiracy, combination, attempt to monopolize, or monopolization of trade or commerce of the Commonwealth is unlawful. Va. Code Section 59.1-9.6.
Unlawful to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities or services of like grade or quality, where the purchasers are in competition and where the discrimination may substantially lessen competition or may tend to create a monopoly. Va. Code Section 59.1-9.7(a).
Certain categories of materials are copyrightable. 17 U.S.C. Section 102(a).
The work must be original. 17 U.S.C. Section 102(a).
The work must be creative. “The requisite level of creativity is extremely low.” Alcatel USA, Inc. v. DGI Technologies, Inc., 166 F. 3d 772, 787 (5th Cir. 1999).
The work must be “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression. “A work is ‘fixed’ in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration.” 17 U.S.C. Section 101.
News articles are copyrightable, but copyright protection does not extend to factual information in the articles. See Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 353-54 (1991).
The Copyright Act “protects expression, not facts. A compilation of facts is not entitled to copyright protection unless the compilation itself possesses some degree of originality.” Alcatel USA, Inc. v. DGI Technologies, Inc., 166 F. 3d 772, 786 (5th Cir. 1999); see also Konor Enterprises, Inc. v. Eagle Publications, Inc., 878 F.2d 138 (4th Cir. 1989).
New media such as websites (home pages, etc.) have copyright protection.
The copyright belongs to the author. 17 U.S.C. Section 201(a).
With “works for hire,” the employer for whom the work was prepared is considered the author unless the parties have agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them. 17 U.S.C. Section 201(b).
specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work or a compilation if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work for hire. 17 U.S.C. Section 101.
Ownership may be affected by whether the work is performed by an employee or an independent contractor. Use common law agency principles to determine whether a person is an employee or an independent contractor. See Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989).
Display (directly or indirectly to the public).
No infringement of copyright if “fair use,” which includes criticism, comment, and news reporting. 17 U.S.C. Section 107.
17 U.S.C. Section 107(1)-(4); see Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, 908 F. Supp. 1362 (E.D. Va. 1995) (copying documents for news gathering and news reporting may not be a violation of a copyright if the four factors for “fair use” are satisfied).
Unauthorized reproduction of a photo generally violates the Copyright Act, but a “fair use” may exist if the photo has already been disseminated, the photo is particularly newsworthy, and the user acquired the photo in good faith. See Nunez v. Caribbean Int’l. News Corp., 235 F. 3d 18 (1st Cir. 2000).
works that the copyright owner has granted to the public domain.
The copyright symbol is not required. (optional after March 1, 1989). Do not think you can use a work just because there is no copyright notice.
Citing the author (avoiding plagiarism) is not a defense to copyright infringement.
Internet availability does not mean there is no copyright. Owners/authors do not give up copyrights by placing material on the internet.
The fact that your “publication” is free is not determinative.
International: Almost all major countries have signed the Berne Copyright Convention, making every creative work copyrighted at the time it is put into tangible form.
Lanham Act Trademark law makes it unlawful to use “any word, term, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact,” in connection with any goods or services if the use is likely to cause confusion or mistake by another person. 15 U.S.C. Section 1125(a)(1); see The Hub, Inc. v. Manhattan-Ward, Inc., 673 F. Supp. 770 (W.D. Va. 1987). (Examples using similar designs to trademark, trade dress, or business name).
damage to the party whose relationship or expectancy has been disrupted.
See Chaves v. Johnson, 230 Va. 112, 120 (1985); see also Meadow Limited Partnership v. Heritage Savings & Loan, 639 F. Supp. 643, 651 (E.D. Va. 1986).
The law is not settled regarding whether a person can tortiously interfere with his or her own contract. See Chaves v. Johnson, 230 Va. 112, 120 (1985) (providing that a person cannot tortiously interfere with a contract to which he or she is a party). But see Worrie v. Boze, 198 Va. 533, 540 (1957) (allowing a tort action for conspiring to breach one’s own contract); Elliott v. Shore Stop, Inc., 238 Va. 237 (1989) (allowing an employee to maintain a tortious interference claim against the employer based on a contract to which the employee was a party); Catercorp, Inc. v. Catering Concepts, Inc., 246 Va. 22 (1993) (reaffirming a cause of action for conspiring to breach one’s own contract).
Virginia Code Sections 18.2-499 and 18.2-500 make it unlawful to conspire to willfully and maliciously injure another person in his or her reputation, trade, business or profession, and create a civil cause of action to recover treble damages and attorney’s fees.
See Va. Code Section 18.2-499; Allen Realty Corp. v. Holbert, 227 Va. 441, 449 (1984).
The Virginia Trade Secrets Act protects “information, including but not limited to, a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and (2) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.” Va. Code Section 59.1-336.
See Trandes Corp. v. Guy F. Atkinson Company, 996 F. 2d 655 (4th Cir. 1993); Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, 908 F. Supp. 1362, 1368 (E.D. Va. 1995).
Generally, anything that is used to generate an advantage over competitors can be the subject of trade secret protection, but the plaintiff must take “reasonably security measures” to maintain the secrecy of the information. See Dionne v. Southeast Foam Converting and Packaging, Inc., 240 Va. 297 (1990).
Defamation includes libel and slander.
Libel is the publication of defamatory matter by written or printed words. 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 7 (1995).
Slander is the publication of defamatory matter by spoken words or gestures. 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 8 (1995).
damage to the plaintiff’s reputation.
See 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Sections 21-29 (1995).
See Yeagle v. Collegiate Times, 255 Va. 293, 297 (1998); Freelander v. Eden’s Broadcasting, Inc., 734 F. Supp. 221, 225 (E.D. Va. 1990).
Defamation per quod: The defamatory meaning of the published statement arises by innuendo based on a combination of the published statement and known extrinsic facts. See Freelander v. Eden’s Broadcasting, Inc., 734 F. Supp. 221, 226 (E.D. Va. 1990).
To recover compensatory damages, the plaintiff must show that the defendant acted negligently. See Gazette, Inc. v. Harris, 229 Va. 1, 15 (1985) (stating that the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant knew the statement was false, or believed it to be true but lacked reasonable grounds for such belief, or acted negligently in failing to ascertain the facts on which publication was based).
To recover punitive damages, the plaintiff must show actual malice on the part of the defendant. See Great Coastal Express, Inc. v. Ellington, 230 Va. 142, 152 (1985).
The plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice (i.e., with knowledge that the publication of defamatory matter was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false). See Freelander v. Eden’s Broadcasting, Inc.; 734 F. Supp. 221, 229 (E.D. Va. 1990). Smith v. Huntsville Times Co., Inc., No. 102199, 2004 WL 473377 (Ala. Mar. 12, 2004); Tucker v. Philadelphia Daily News, No. 47EAP2001, 2004 WL 909704 (Pa. Apr. 29, 2004).
The determination of whether the plaintiff is a public figure is “based on two considerations: the plaintiff’s access to the media, and the extent to which the plaintiff, by virtue of his position in the community or involvement in a particular matter of public concern, can be said to invite public comment and attention.” Freelander v. Eden’s Broadcasting, Inc., 734 F. Supp. 221, 229 (E.D. Va. 1990); see also Gertz v. Welch, 418 U.S. 323, 344-45 (1974).
In a defamation action, truth is an absolute defense. See New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 279 (1964).
In Virginia, “truth is no longer an affirmative defense to be established by the defendant. Instead, the plaintiff must prove falsity, because he is required to establish negligence with respect to such falsity.” Gazette, Inc. v. Harris, 229 Va. 1, 15 (1985).
Consent: If a person invites, requests, or consents to a statement, no defamation cause of action exists. See 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 272 (1995).
Protects defendant from liability even if the statement was false and defendant acted with malice. See 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 274 (1995).
Examples include communications between spouses, and judicial, legislative, and executive proceedings. See Elder v. Holland, 208 Va. 15, 21 (1967); 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 275 (1995).
Protects defendant when he acted without malice and within the scope of his duties and authority. See Elder v. Holland, 208 Va. 15, 21 (1967); 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 276 (1995).
“A communication made in good faith on a subject matter in which the person communicating has an interest, or owes a duty, legal, moral, or social, is qualifiedly privileged if made to a person who has a corresponding interest or duty.” See Great Coastal Express, Inc. v. Ellington, 230 Va. 142, 153 (1985).
Reports of public hearings or meetings may be protected by a qualified privilege. The privilege excuses accurate reports of statements that were false when made but does not excuse inaccuracies in the reporting of the statements. See 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 277 (1995).
Comment and criticism are subject to the qualified privilege if the matter commented on is something in the public interest. See 50 Am. Jur. 2d Libel and Slander Section 277 (1995).
there is nothing in the article itself that could reasonably have placed the newspaper on notice of potential inaccuracy.
See Howe v. Detroit Free Press, 586 N.W.2d 85 (Mich. 1998).
Please note: This page is provided for general informational purposes only and is a marketing publication of Gentry Locke Rakes & Moore, LLP. It is intended to alert visitors to developments in the law and is does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. You are urged to consult your own lawyer concerning your situation and specific legal questions you may have.
 The term “commodity” includes any kind of real or personal property. Va. Code Section 59.1-9.3(c).
 The term “service” includes any activity that is performed in whole or in part for financial gain, including but not limited to personal service, rental, leasing or licensing for use. Va. Code Section 59.1-9.3(d). Advertising would qualify as a “service.” See Berlyn, Inc. v. Gazette Newspapers, Inc., 157 F. Supp. 2d 609, 626 (D. Md. 2001) (applying similar Maryland statute).
 “Literary works” includes “works, other than audiovisual works, expressed in words, numbers, or other verbal or numerical symbols or indicia, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such as books, periodicals, manuscripts, phonorecords, film, tapes, disks, or cards, in which they are embodied.” 17 U.S.C. Section 101.
 “Pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works” includes “two-dimensional and three-dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, diagrams, model, and technical drawings, including architectural plans.” 17 U.S.C. Section 101.
 Works prior to 1978 , published without copyright notice.
 Works between 1978 and 1989 were given a five-year period to correct any publication without copyright notice.
 Government private subcontractors may obtain and transfer copyright to government.
 It is still common practice to give copyright notice. It is still required in some countries. We recommend: “‘Copyright symbol’ Copyright 2004 J. Scott Sexton, All Rights Reserved.” When giving the notice, the year of publication and author are required. On works for hire, the person paying for the work is designated as copyright holder (e.g. Reuters, Assoc. Press).
Scott Sexton’s experience as a Senior Litigation Partner includes complex commercial litigation, products liability, toxic torts, significant property disputes, mineral cases, catastrophic injuries, mass torts, and multi-district litigation. He chairs the firm’s Mineral, Energy & Natural Resources section, has been recognized by his peers as a Leader in the Law for his role in developing the law in Virginia, is a charter member of the International Institute of Environmental, Energy and Natural Resources Law, a member of the Energy and Mineral Law Foundation, and a Fellow in the Litigation Counsel of America.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.