Source: http://lawtheories.com/?p=239
Timestamp: 2017-11-24 07:40:45
Document Index: 284277366

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 204', '§ 7001', '§ 101', '§ 10', '§ 7001', '§ 7006', '§ 2', '§ 7006']

Fourth Circuit: Clickwrap Agreement Fulfills Writing Requirement for Copyright Transfer – Law Theories
July 23, 2013 July 2, 2014 Devlin HartlineComments are off for this post.
Section 204’s writing requirement is not unduly burdensome; it necessitates neither protracted negotiations nor substantial expense. The rule is really quite simple: If the copyright holder agrees to transfer ownership to another party, that party must get the copyright holder to sign a piece of paper saying so. It doesn’t have to be the Magna Charta; a one-line pro forma statement will do.8
17 U.S.C.A. § 204(a) (West 2013) (“A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorized agent.”). ↩
For some reason, Scribd sometimes changes the font and makes documents difficult to read. When this happens, I have found that downloading the file and opening it up, rather than reading it from within the Scribd website, fixes the formatting issues. ↩
See Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, Pub. L. 106-229, 114 Stat. 464; codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 7001-31. ↩
Christopher M. Newman, A License Is Not A “Contract Not to Sue”: Disentangling Property and Contract in the Law of Copyright Licenses, 98 Iowa L. Rev. 1101, 1140 n.167 (2013) (internal quotations and citations omitted). ↩
Schiller & Schmidt, Inc. v. Nordisco Corp., 969 F.2d 410, 412 (7th Cir. 1992) (discussing Section 101’s requirement of a signed writing in the context of a work made for hire). ↩
Newman, 98 Iowa L. Rev. at 1140. ↩
Effects Associates, Inc. v. Cohen, 908 F.2d 555, 557 (9th Cir. 1990) (internal citations and quotations omitted; paragraph break added). ↩
17 U.S.C.A. § 101 (West 2013) (“A ‘transfer of copyright ownership’ is an assignment, mortgage, exclusive license, or any other conveyance, alienation, or hypothecation of a copyright or of any of the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, whether or not it is limited in time or place of effect, but not including a nonexclusive license.”). ↩
Ballas v. Tedesco, 41 F.Supp.2d 531, 541 (D.N.J. 1999); this opinion predates the E-SIGN Act, which went into effect on October 1, 2000. ↩
3-10 Nimmer on Copyright § 10.03[A][1]. ↩
See Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Home Realty Network, Inc., 888 F.Supp.2d 691 (D. Md. 2012), modified on clarification, 904 F.Supp.2d 530 (D. Md. 2012). ↩
15 U.S.C.A. § 7001(a) (West 2013). ↩
15 U.S.C.A. § 7006(5) (West 2013). ↩
Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc., 888 F.Supp.2d at 708. ↩
Id. at 710. ↩
Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Home Realty Network, Inc., 904 F.Supp.2d 530, 539 (D. Md. 2012). ↩
See Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Home Realty Network, Inc., Case No. 12-2102, 2013 WL 3722365 (4th Cir. July 17, 2013). ↩
Id. at *8 (internal citations and quotations omitted). ↩
Id. (internal citations and quotations omitted). ↩
See Vergara Hermosilla v. Coca-Cola Co., Case No. 10-21418, 2011 WL 744098 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 23, 2011), aff’d sub nom., Hermosilla v. Coca-Cola Co., 446 F.App’x 201 (11th Cir. 2011). ↩
Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc., 2013 WL 3722365 at *9. ↩
See 9 U.S.C. § 2. ↩
See Craigslist Inc. v. 3Taps Inc., Complaint, Case No. 12-03816, 2012 WL 3011009 (N.D. Cal. July 20, 2012). ↩
Craigslist Inc. v. 3Taps Inc., Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions to Dismiss, Case No. 12-03816, 2013 WL 1819999, *6 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 30, 2013). ↩
Id. at *7 (internal quotations omitted; ellipses in original.). ↩
15 U.S.C.A. § 7006(5) (West 2013) (emphasis added). ↩
Pepco Energy Servs., Inc. v. Geiringer, Case No. 07-04809, 2010 WL 318284, *2 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2010) (unpublished opinion). ↩
See Berry v. Webloyalty.com, Inc., Case No. 10-01358, 2011 WL 1375665, *7 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 11, 2011), opinion vacated and remanded on other grounds, Case No. 11-55764, 2013 WL 1767718 (9th Cir. Apr. 25, 2013). ↩
Tagged as: clickwrap agreement, Craigslist, E-SIGN Act, Fourth Circuit, Section 204(a), transfer of copyright ownership, writing requirement
One thought on “Fourth Circuit: Clickwrap Agreement Fulfills Writing Requirement for Copyright Transfer”
Pingback: Fourth Circuit: Clickwrap Agreement Fulfills Writing Requirement for Copyright Transfer | Copyhype