Source: https://ja.scribd.com/document/314477521/cbs-sj
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 12:17:17+00:00

Document:
ABS Entertainment, Inc. v. CBS Corporation, et al.
for May 2, 2016, is vacated, and the matter taken off calendar.
of New York state law to the New York Court of Appeal.
for use in albums, CDs, audiovisual works, and for streaming and downloading over the Internet.
distribution of Plaintiffs works, including as part of compilation albums with other sound recordings.
shall be construed as suggesting that Plaintiffs have been properly joined in this action.
Paul Tarnopol is the president and co-owner of Brunswick. (Tarnopol Decl. 1.) Thomas J. Couch Sr.
declarations, the Court has not relied on any of the disputed statements.
individual state. 17 U.S.C. 301(c).
in the prior sound recording.
appeal before the Ninth Circuit in Flo & Eddie Inc. v. Pandora Media, Inc., Case No. 15-55287.
moving party has the burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact for trial.
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 256, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 2514, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986).
court that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving partys case. Celotex Corp. v.
Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249, 252). Otherwise, summary judgment shall be entered.
of Plaintiffs works. Accordingly, CBS is entitled to summary judgment.
represent enough original authorship to be registered.
Although Circulars do not have the force of statute, they are a fair summary of the law.
775, 779 (9th Cir. 2002).
(1st Cir. 2010) (internal quotations omitted).
preexisting material. U.S. Auto Parts Network, Inc. v. Parts Geek, LLC, 692 F.3d 1009, 1016 (9th Cir.
U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices 803.9(F)(3) (3d ed. 2014).
___ F. Supp. 3d ___, No. 14-CV-03883-EMC, 2016 WL 141707, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2016).
internal cuts. Pryor v. Jean, No. CV 13-02867 DDP (AJWx), 2014 WL 5023088 at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct.
8, 2014) (quoting 1 Melville B. Miller and David Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright 2.10[A][b]).
The Court will consider the parties evidence of originality, or a lack thereof.
personally remastered some version of at least 46 of the sound recordings at issue in this case.
mechanical transfer of the original master to the new master, with no alterations to the sound recording.
licensee to create a derivative work. See Section III.B.3.
overall amplitude level and range of the entire recording (loudness range).
loudness range to implement their decisions.
Moreover, the evidence of originality is not strictly limited to evidence introduced by CBS.
mixing engineer at least has to decide the levels of each track. Which vocal performances do you want.
In paragraph 12 of his declaration, Mr. Geluso claims that: Dr. Begaults analysis is incomplete.
embodied the same performance as Plaintiffs Pre-1972 Sound Recordings.
graphs taken from his testing software which serve as visual exhibits demonstrating his scientific testing.
known as phase inversion testing which revealed differences in the first several works which Mr.
unnecessary to aid a fact finder capable of listening to the sound recordings on his or her own.
Aluminum Works, Ltd. v. Wismarq Corp., 2003 WL 1797844, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 3, 2003).
objected to portions of Mr. Gelusos declaration.
genuine dispute of material fact as to the amount of originality added during the remastering process.
([T]he Court listened to the soundtrack of both works. . . .).
Decl., Ex. E at 154-157, 165, 169.) Accordingly, the Court will disregard the statement.
Recordings into a different format.
that the plaintiffs alteration to the soundtrack required a creative mixing and balancing of sounds.
489 (2d Cir. 1976) (Many of these differences are not perceptible to the casual observer.); Agee v.
sound recording which, aside from a transfer to a new medium, was unchanged); U.S. v. Taxe, 380 F.
were insubstantial to the human ear and were intended to be so).
Plaintiffs also heavily rely on Capitol Records, Inc. v. Naxos of Am., Inc., 830 N.E.2d 250 (N.Y.
that, as a matter of New York law, the new product defense failed. Id.
Plaintiffs or their predecessors in interest.
entitled to federal copyright protection.
purportedly defeat summary judgment. (Oppn, 23-25.) However, as explained below, none have merit.
argument is based largely on Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc., 225 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2000).
need never have actually been copyrighted. Id. at 1079.
pre-1972 Sound Recordings are federally copyrightable.
salt presumably the equivalent of the original expression added during the remastering process.
preparation of derivative works based upon the copyrighted work. U.S. Auto Parts Network, Inc. v.
Parts Geek, LLC, 692 F.3d 1009, 1016 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting 17 U.S.C. 106(2)); see also 17 U.S.C.
extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.).
declarations of Wilson, Kariganer, Tarnopol, and Couch. (Wilson Decl. 6, 9-12; Kartiganer Decl.
protection even in a licensed derivative work, that contractual provision would appear to govern. Id.
created, and demonstrate that they affirmatively barred the creation of a copyrightable work. See L.A.
Printex Indus., Inc. v. Aeropostale, No. CV 08-07085 DDP (Ex), 2010 WL 2813800, at *3 (C.D. Cal.
May 5, 2010), revd on other grounds sub nom. L.A. Printex Indus., Inc. v. Aeropostale, Inc., 466 F.
copyrightable derivative work, Plaintiffs would have defeated CBSs summary judgment motion.
However, Plaintiffs have failed to do so.
payment, and to perform them through digital platforms under a statutory compulsory license. 17 U.S.C.
recording did not infringe the original sound recording).
works at issue in this case, and lacked personal knowledge to make the statements in their declarations.
question of whether a valid copyright exists . . . .).
CBS maintains a Digital Audio Library, which CBS internally refers to as Radio 2.0.
CBS had played 60 songs with a title and artist matching an entry identified in Plaintiffs Schedules.
analyzed in the same manner as the works identified in the third party reports.
occasionally require artists to create multiple sound recordings based on the same musical composition.
making copyrighted works available violates the copyright owners distribution rights. E.g., Hotaling v.
has largely been criticized as inconsistent with the text of 17 U.S.C. 106(3). See Atl. Recording Corp.
v. Howell, 554 F. Supp. 2d 976, 982-83 (D. Ariz. 2008) (collecting cases); see also Fox Broad. Co. v.
Plaintiffs clearly lack any protection in the first place.
Accordingly, summary judgment is appropriate as to the remaining 74 sound recordings.
grounds as the Triton Reports. The Court sustains CBSs objection on hearsay and foundation grounds.
The Court will issue a Judgment consistent with this order.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

v. 
 v.