Source: http://www.seattlecopyrightwatch.com/copyright/copyright-infringement/
Timestamp: 2013-05-19 19:22:32
Document Index: 462056921

Matched Legal Cases: ['§408', '§202', '§106', '§504', '§502', '§503', '§505', '§502', '§503']

Copyright infringement : Seattle Copyright Watch : Washington Intellectual Property Lawyer : Licensing Attorney Tonya Gisselberg
A-Z Sporting Goods, due process, Due Process Clause, express aiming, Fourteenth Amendment, intentional act, knowledge that harm suffered in forum state, long-arm statute, minimum contacts, personal jurisdiction, purposeful direction, something more, traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice, Washington Shoe, willful copyright infringement
Seattle photographer Christopher Boffoli sued Twitter in federal court in the Western District of Washington, Seattle. Boffoli’s Disparity Series “comically pairs teeny human figurines with real-life foods in extreme close-up.” Patrick Hutchison describes the Disparity Series in greater detail, and includes pictures, in his article Christopher Boffoli’s Strange Little Worlds. The Disparity Series seems to be popular among Twitter users. Boffoli’s complaint alleges that Twitter users copy his registered Disparity Series photos without license, that the infringing photos are posted on Twitter or third-party servers, and that Tweets advertise or link to each infringing use. The complaint further alleges that Twitter has not removed infringing uses from its servers or disabled links to infringing uses, despite receiving four Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notices from Boffoli.
Christopher Boffoli, copyright infringement, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Disparity Series, DMCA, Patrick Hutchison, Twitter, willful copyright infringement
U.S. Postal Service Forced to Pay Royalty Reflecting Market Value for Infringing The Column Copyright
When the U.S. Postal Service decided to issue a stamp depicting The Column, the focal point of the Korean War Veterans’ Memorial in Washington, D.C., it licensed the photograph from the photographer, but neglected to obtain a license from the creator of The Column, sculptor Frank Gaylord. The Column is comprised of nineteen stainless steel sculptures, symbolizing a platoon of soldiers. Gaylord sued the Postal Service for copyright infringement in 2006. In 2010, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Gaylord owned the copyright to The Column, that the Postal Service was liable for infringement and remanded the case to the Court of Federal Claims to determine the damages. On remand, the Court of Federal Claims awarded Gaylord a one-time royalty of $5,000, rejecting both Gaylord’s claim of a 10% royalty on revenues of $30.2 million allegedly produced by the Postal Service’s infringing use and Gaylord’s claim for prejudgment interest. The Court of Federal Claims used a “zone of reasonableness” analysis in reaching its decision. It determined that since the Postal Service paid the photographer a $1,500 royalty and since the Postal Service’s evidence showed that the Postal Service had never paid more for a license of an existing image to put on a stamp than $5,000, the zone of reasonableness was between $1,500 and $5,000. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals again reversed and remanded.
copyright infringement, Frank Gaylord, Korean War Veterans' Memorial, Postal Service, reasonable and entire compensation, The Column, US Postal Service
This is a summary of the allegations in Domain Tools’ complaint. Domain Tools, LLC is a King County-based company offering online domain name research and monitoring services. Domain Tools’ services include domain name research, registration research, WHOIS information, historical WHOIS information and historical static screenshots of the home pages of websites that have been associated with specific domain names. WHOIS information is the contact information that everyone who registers a domain name must provide, as per ICANN requirements. ICANN is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers and is the entity that controls the domain name system. The historical screenshots provided by Domain Tools are not interactive and do not substitute for live websites. Domain Tools believes that by providing access to historical information about the Internet, it provides a service that benefits the public. The DOMAINTOOLS trademark is registered on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Principal Register, which means that it is a distinctive trademark. Domain Tools, LLC is the exclusive licensee of the mark. Continue Reading
DC Comics, owner of registered copyrights in the Batman comic book character, sued Mark Towle, dba Gotham Garage, for copyright infringement for reproducing and distributing unauthorized and counterfeit Batmobile vehicles. Judge Ronald S.W. Lew, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, recently denied defendant Towle’s motion to dismiss DC Comics' copyright claim. The defendant filed a Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A Rule 12(b)(6) motion can be granted for “the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the lack of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.” (Order pdf page 2).
Batman, Batmobile, DC Comics, Gotham Garage, Mark Towle, non-functional artistic elements, useful article, utilitarian function
Allumination Filmworks LLC, Amazon.com, Baker & Taylor Inc., Bruce Lee, Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do, Bruce Lee: Path of the Dragon, copyright infringement, copyright management information, Ingram Entertainment Holdings Inc., Legacy Productions Limited, Phoenix Films Proprietary, The Intercepting Fist, Warrior Within Proprietary Limited
Football Scouting Organization Files Suit for Copyright Infringement and Trade Secret Misappropriation Over Leaked Scouting Reports
National Football Scouting, Inc. (NFS) recently filed a complaint (pdf) in the Western District of Washington, Tacoma, for copyright infringement and misappropriation and dissemination of trade secrets against The Sports Xchange, Inc., (TSX) and Rob Rang, one of TSX’s employees.
The parties. NFS is a scouting organization owned by nineteen National Football League clubs. NFS prepares scouting reports for the clubs that own its shares. The scouting reports “are proprietary and copyrighted trade secrets that belong exclusively to NFS.” (Complaint pdf page 2). NFS’s principal place of business is in Indianapolis, Indiana.
TSX is a corporation that publishes football scouting information and does business as NFLDraftScout.com. TSX’s principal place of business is Sacramento, California.
Rob Rang is a sportswriter and employee of TSX. He lives in Gig Harbor, Washington.
The alleged facts. NFS institutes a number of measures to protect its trade secrets, including requiring the clubs that own shares to enter into written agreements acknowledging that the scouting reports are proprietary information and trade secrets belonging to NFS; prohibiting the shareholder clubs from disseminating the information to anyone other than employees who need access to it to do their work; posting terms of use on its website that come up after log on; requiring agreement to a confidentiality provision before a shareholder employee can download content; and requiring its own employees and technology vendor employees to sign confidentiality agreements. “NFS takes every reasonable step to maintain and keep the Scouting Information confidential.” (Complaint pdf page 4). See my blog post entitled Not All Organizational Secrets are Trade Secrets for a more complete discussion of trade secrets. The information contained in the scouting reports is obtained by scouts who travel to college campuses throughout the country, then organized, evaluated and analyzed by NFS. This is done at great expense to the shareholder clubs. The scouting reports prepared by NFS give the shareholder clubs a competitive advantage over non-member clubs.
NFS registered its scouting reports with the Copyright Office as unpublished works. This allowed NFS to register the works without disclosing their contents to the Copyright Office and without disclosing NFS’s proprietary information. 17 U.S.C. §408 and 37 C.F.R. §202.20 address registering unpublished works.
Even though NFS makes substantial efforts to protect its trade secrets, TSX and Rang have repeatedly obtained and published information in NFS’ scouting reports through cbssports.com. TSX and Rang have received compensation for knowingly and willfully disseminating NFS’s trade secrets. NFS has informed TSX and Rang that the scouting reports are confidential and proprietary, has demanded that TSX and Rang cease and desist from disclosing NFS’s scouting reports in publications and has demanded that TSX and Rang remove the offending material and return any copies of the materials to NFS. TSX and Rang have not complied with NFS’s demands. TSX and Rang continued to publish NFS’s scouting information on such college football players as Prince Amukamara, Dontay Moch, Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Nick Foles, Juron Criner, Chris Owusu and Terrell Pryor. Trade secret count. NFS alleged that “Defendants’ continued knowing publication of NFS’s trade secrets constitutes deliberate, intentional, and outrageous conduct, warranting an award of exemplary damages.” (Complaint pdf page 9). NFS alleged that, based on TSX’s and Rang’s past conduct, they will continue to unlawfully disseminate NFS’s trade secrets and that NFS has been irreparably harmed.
NFS requested a temporary and a permanent injunction,
Ordering the defendants to cease and desist publication or dissemination of NFS’s scouting information;
Ordering the defendants to remove the content from the Internet, weblogs and other media;
Ordering the defendants to return any copies of NFS’s materials;
Ordering the defendants to preserve all electronic data in their control, so that NFS can have computer forensics technicians remove NFS’s trade secrets found in it;
Order the defendants to allow NFS to inspect defendant’s email accounts so that NFS can investigate defendants’ sources of NFS’s information; and
Enjoin the defendants from engaging in such conduct in the future.
Trade secrets are protected by state law, not federal law. Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron. Washington State adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, codified under Chapter 19.108.
Copyright count. NFS alleged that the scouting reports prepared by it are original works that are owned by NFS. NFS alleged that the defendants published portions of NFS’s scouting reports, without authorization, and in violation of the Copyright Act. NFS alleged that the defendants deliberately and willfully infringed its copyrights in the scouting reports. NFS requested the court to require defendants to disgorge all of their profits from the infringements and award actual damages or statutory damages up to $150,000 for each copyright infringed.
This case is National Football Scouting, Inc., v. Rob Rang and The Sports Xchange, Inc., Case No. 11-05762-RBL, Western District of Washington, Tacoma.
Chris Owusu, Christian Ponder, copyright infringement, Dontay Moch, Jake Locker, Juron Criner, National Football League, National Football Scouting, Nick Foles, Prince Amukamara, Rob Rang, Sports Xchange, Terrell Pryor, trade secrets
Photographer Alleges Copyright Infringement Over U.S. Fund for UNICEF's Use of Photographs
Plaintiff William Anthony Photography, Inc. (WAP) specializes in portrait and editorial photography. WAP filed suit for copyright infringement against United States Fund for UNICEF (U.S. Fund for UNICEF) in the Western District of Washington. The dispute centers on whether U.S. Fund for UNICEF exceeded the scope of its license from WAP in its use of WAP’s copyrighted photographs.
WAP’s complaint (pdf) alleges the following: U.S. Fund for UNICEF’s nationwide BELIEVE IN ZERO campaign began in approximately 2008 and features numerous celebrities. UNICEF enlisted The Matale Line LLC (Matale Line), a Seattle-based advertising agency, to assist with the campaign. Matale Line then enlisted WAP to take photographs for the BELIEVE IN ZERO campaign. WAP was based in Seattle at the time. “WAP licensed the images to UNICEF for the BELIEVE IN ZERO campaign at a grossly reduced rate because of the limited scope of the license and because of the philanthropic mission of the BELIEVE IN ZERO campaign.” (Complaint pdf page 2). The invoices to U.S. Fund for UNICEF for the images limited their use to the BELIEVE IN ZERO “print campaign.” U.S. Fund for UNICEF paid the invoices without disputing them. WAP took photos of Nicole Ritchie, Joel Madden, Amare Stoudemire, Lucy Liu, Laurence Fishburne and Alyssa Milano for the campaign. WAP registered the images with the Copyright Office. After paying the invoices, U.S. Fund for UNICEF unilaterally expanded its scope of use of WAP’s copyrighted images beyond use in the print campaign. WAP alleges that U.S. Fund for UNICEF’s nationwide use of the images for billboards, bus and train displays and airport video displays (pdf) was unauthorized and exceeded the parties’ agreement for use of the photos only in the print campaign. WAP further alleges that U.S. Fund for UNICEF’s use of the images for illuminated displays (pdf) in train stations and on the Internet (pdf) was unauthorized and exceeded the parties’ agreement for use of the photos only in the print campaign. WAP alleges that U.S. Fund for UNICEF’s acts infringe its copyrights, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(a). U.S. Fund for UNICEF allegedly failed to contact WAP to use the images outside of the print campaign. WAP alleges willful infringement and requests statutory damages (17 U.S.C. §504(c)), injunctive relief (17 U.S.C. §502), impounding and destruction of the infringing articles (17 U.S.C. §503) and attorney’s fees and costs (17 U.S.C. §505).
This case is William Anthony Photography, Inc. v. United States Fund for UNICEF, Case No. C11-1121 MJP, Western District of Washington at Seattle.
Alyssa Milano, Amare Stoudemire, Believe in Zero, copyright infringement, Joel Madden, Laurence Fishburne, license scope, limited license, Lucy Liu, Nicole Ritchie, The Matale Line LLC, UNICEF, United States Fund for UNICEF, William Anthony Photography Inc.
copyright infringement, copyright preemption, long-arm statute, personal jurisdiction, scenes a faire, Susan Tierney Cockburn, SWS Industries, trade dress, useful article, Washington State Consumer Protection Act, Washington State CPA, Washington State trade dress, Washington State trade name
Washington Shoe's Exhibit A (pdf) to its complaint is a copy of the copyright certificate and deposit for the Magic Carpet design. Exhibit B contains photographs of the boots offered for sale by Academy.
Academy Sports + Outdoors, copyright infringement, Magic Carpet Boot, Washington Shoe Company, Zebra Supreme Boot
VendNovation alleges that it, Apex and a vending machine manufacturer formed a three-way venture to manufacture, market and license vending machines with VendNovation’s Web Management Software and control boards. The parties operated under an oral agreement for about two years. VendNovation alleges that in April 2008, Apex wanted to acquire VendNovation’s assets or become an exclusive licensee and obtain access to VendNovation’s source code so that it could pursue an opportunity with a large customer (Fastenal). VendNovation declined, but Apex started selling vending machines with VendNovation’s Web Management Software and control boards to Fastenal without an exclusive license from VendNovation or access to its source code. The Web Management Software used by Fastenal was hosted on VendNovation’s servers.
VendNovation alleges that it entered into a written licensing contract with Apex in February 2009. The license reiterates VendNovation’s ownership in the software, control boards and derivative works. The license provides that Apex can access VendNovation’s source code and produce derivative works only if VendNovation becomes insolvent. VendNovation allegedly learned in January 2011 that Apex ordered vending machines from the manufacturer without VendNovation’s control boards. It alleges that Apex developed its own competing control board and an inferior substitute for VendNovation’s Web Management Software. Some people installing Apex’s competing software believed that VendNovation designed the software and contacted VendNovation for technical support. VendNovation alleges that Apex sold vending machines with Apex’s competing control board and access to Apex’s competing software to Fastenal. Apex also sold a desktop vending machine model incorporating VendNovation’s control board and Apex’s competing web management software to Fastenal and others.
VendNovation’s cause of action for copyright infringement includes claims against Apex of willful infringement and Apex’s unauthorized copying, distributing and creation of derivative works. VendNovation requests injunctive relief under 17 USC §502 and impounding and destruction of infringing materials pursuant to 17 USC §503. The number for this case is Case 2:11-cv-00700-JLR, Western District of Washington at Seattle.
Apex Industrial Technologies LLC, copyright infringement, Fastenal, source code, VendNovation LLC
Microsoft Complaint Against Hagen and BC Tech Gear Survives Motion to Dismiss
Microsoft filed a complaint against Jason W. Hagen, doing business as BC Tech Gear, also known as BCMT, Inc. and Doubletimeit, and other defendants in the Eastern District of California on December 1, 2009. The case was transferred to the Western District of Washington on August 31, 2010. The First Amended Complaint was filed on February 16, 2010.
The First Amended Complaint (pdf) claims copyright infringement; federal trademark infringement; false designation of origin, false description and false representation; common law unfair competition; imposition of constructive trust; and requests an accounting. Microsoft alleges that Defendants advertise, market and distribute computer software, including purported Microsoft software. Defendants allegedly do business in Fresno, California and Ridgefield, Washington.
Microsoft alleges that the Defendants distributed counterfeit Windows XP Pro software components numerous times between March and June 2007. Microsoft sent Defendants a letter in August 2007 notifying Defendants of their infringing activity and asking them to stop. Defendants distributed the counterfeit products several more times between February 2008 and June 2009. Microsoft sent a second letter in June 2009, informing Defendants that they may have distributed illegal and/or unlicensed software. Defendants distributed the counterfeit software to an investigator in October 2009. Defendants allegedly advertised, marketed and/or distributed reproductions, copies or colorable imitations of Microsoft’s copyrighted materials, trademarks, logos and service mark.
Defendant Jason W. Hagen, appearing pro se, filed a motion to dismiss on June 29, 2010 and an amended motion to dismiss on January 30, 2011. In his amended motion to dismiss, Hagen argued insufficiency of service of process under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(4) in that he did not receive an Amended Summons naming him as a defendant, the lack of a plain statement showing why Plaintiff is entitled to relief under Rule 8(a)(2) and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6), as the wrong party was named. Hagen claimed that there was no evidence connecting him with the activity complained of. Specifically, Hagen argued that Microsoft was unable to connect his name to the eBay user name “bctechgear,” under which Microsoft alleged some of the infringing sales occurred from Fresno, California. Hagen argued that the complaint did not meet the standard of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly.
The Court’s Ruling (pdf)
A complaint may be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim that would entitle him to relief.
The court cited Bell Atlantic v. Twombly in declaring “[a] court may dismiss a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) if the plaintiff’s factual allegations are not sufficient ‘to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” The court quoted Ashcroft v. Iqbal: “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” The court ruled that Microsoft sufficiently put Hagen on notice of its copyright and trademark infringement claims pursuant to Rule 8. Hagen argued that he is the wrong party and that some other person misappropriated his name. The court noted that a Rule 12(b)(6) review is generally limited to a review of the complaint, but that the court may take judicial notice of public records outside of the pleadings. Microsoft submitted Washington Department of Licensing and Washington State Department of Revenue records showing Hagen doing business as BC Tech Gear. The court concluded
Whether or not someone stole Defendant’s identity when opening and operating BC Tech Gear is inappropriate for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. These issues are appropriately left to discovery and further motions.
The court indicated that the same is true regarding insufficient service. The docket reflects that the summons and complaint were personally served on Hagen and any factual dispute regarding proper service is the subject of further discovery.
Hagen filed a Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint on March 30, 2011. He argued that the complaint did not meet the Rule 12(b)(6) standard and that some finer points had been overlooked; that there was new evidence that the complaint failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6); and that the complaint did not allege fraud with particularity, as required by Rule 9(b). The court denied the motion (pdf) on April 4, 2011, citing Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule 7(h)(1) (page 11):
Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily denied [sic] such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.
The court found that there was no error in its prior ruling or new facts or legal authority to indicate error in the prior ruling.
The case number is Western District of Washington at Tacoma, No. C10-5621 RJB.
BC Tech Gear, copyright infringement, eBay, federal trademark infringement, Jason W. Hagen, Microsoft, Windows XP Pro
Northwest Home Designing, Inc. Sues to Enforce its Home Design Copyrights in Federal Court
Northwest Home Designing, Inc. filed two complaints alleging copyright infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on April 15, 2011. In the first case, Northwest Home Designing, Inc. (NHD) sued (pdf) Golden Key Construction, Inc., Capstone Land Development, Inc., Cornerstone Brokers, Inc., individuals believed to be associated with the corporate defendants and an architectural designer. NHD designs and sells home plans. It alleged that it owns copyrights in original collective works and original and derivative home plans. NHD publishes its home plans in catalogs and trade publications and makes them available on the Internet. NHD alleged that (1) the defendants obtained copies of two of its home plans without permission or consent from NHD; (2) the defendants had the NHD home designs redrawn and used the unauthorized copies to build multiple homes; and (3) the defendants marketed and advertised the infringing home plans. NHD further alleged willful infringement. NHD also asked the court for an injunction to prevent the defendants from continuing to infringe NHD’s copyrights.
The second case (pdf) names defendants Pioneer Pacific, Inc., Caliber Company Inc., and individuals believed to be associated with the corporate defendants. NHD alleged that (1) the defendants obtained a copy of one of its home plans without permission or consent from NHD; (2) the defendants redrew the NHD plans and used the unauthorized copies to build multiple homes; and (3) the defendants marketed and advertised the infringing home plans. NHD again alleged willfulness and asked for an injunction.
In a third case, NHD recently obtained a consent judgment (pdf) against Sound Built Homes, Inc. and other defendants for copyright infringement. The complaint (pdf) alleged that (1) the defendants purchased copies of NHD home plans and received a limited license to construct a single home with each of the purchased plans, (2) the defendants copied the NHD designs without NHD’s permission or consent and used the unauthorized copies to build multiple homes, and (3) the defendants marketed the infringing home plans in advertising and on their website. NHD alleged willfulness and asked for an injunction. The findings of fact in the consent judgment indicate that the defendants copied NHD’s copyrighted plans and built homes with those plans without permission. Defendants also created derivative works it used to construct homes, without NHD’s permission. Defendants infringed NHD’s copyrights. Damages were NHD’s lost profits and defendants’ realized profits from the sale of homes built using the unauthorized plans. Defendants were ordered to pay NHD the amount indicated in the settlement agreement and were permanently enjoined from further copying, distributing, making derivative works or otherwise using NHD’s plans without permission or as permitted under the settlement agreement. Each party was responsible for its own litigation fees and costs.
Many thanks to Michael G. Atkins of Graham & Dunn PC for teaching me how to use PACER to find current copyright cases in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Mike publishes Seattle Trademark Lawyer and lectures on trademark law at the University of Washington School of Law.
Caliber Company Inc., Capstone Land Development Inc., copyright infringement, Cornerstone Brokers Inc., Golden Key Construction Inc., Graham & Dunn PC, Michael G. Atkins, Northwest Home Designing Inc., PACER, Pioneer Pacific Inc., Seattle Trademark Lawyer, Sound Built Homes Inc., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, University of Washington School of Law