The Old Fountain Tavern in suburban Atlanta, and its owner, Stephen Clark, are publicly performing musical compositions in connection with the operation of the Dacula business without the authorization or license of the copyright owners, alleged BMI and eight music publishers in an infringement complaint Thursday (docket 1:23-cv-03657) in U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia in Atlanta. BMI contacted Clark more than 40 times by phone, letter and email since April 19 “in an effort to educate” him about his “obligations under the Copyright Act,” and the “necessity of purchasing a license for the public performance of musical compositions” in the BMI repertoire, said the complaint. BMI sent Clark multiple cease and desist notices, giving him “formal notice that he must immediately cease all use of BMI-licensed music” in his tavern, it said. The plaintiffs allege six claims of willful copyright infringement, based on Clark’s “unauthorized public performance of musical compositions” from the BMI repertoire. Unless the court “restrains” Clark from committing further acts of copyright infringement, the plaintiffs “will suffer irreparable injury for which they have no adequate remedy at law,” it said. Besides injunctive relief, the complaint seeks statutory damages, plus court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.
U.S. District Judge John Koeltl for Southern New York in Manhattan resolved in Internet Archive’s favor the parties' dispute over the scope of the permanent injunction barring IA from scanning print copies of physical books and lending the digital copies to users of IA’s website without the publishers’ permission (see 2308140002), said his signed order Friday (docket 1:20-cv-04160). The “narrowly tailored” injunction will apply only to physical books that also have an ebook component, as IA wanted, said the order. The publishers wanted the injunction to cover all books in any format. The action concerned the unauthorized distribution of a select number of books, all of which were commercially available as authorized ebooks, said the order. “That fact was relevant” to the court's conclusion when it granted summary judgment in the publishers’ favor, finding IA was liable for copyright infringement, it said. An injunction covering all in-print books, including those the publishers haven’t made available for electronic licensing, risks going beyond the scope of the issues tried in the case, the order said. “What matters here” is that the case didn’t concern copyrighted works that aren’t yet available in electronic form, “and the parties therefore did not brief the legal issues related to such works,” it said.
Frolic Pictures’ owner Jared Masters seeks an order denying Redoak Communications’ June 30 motion for default for his failure to plead or otherwise defend Redoak’s allegations that he unlawfully sold DVD copies of the horror film Just Before Dawn online without authorization, said Masters’ affidavit Thursday (docket 9:23-cv-80008) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in West Palm Beach. Redoak can’t produce “any documentation, whatsoever,” to support its claim it owns “the copyright at issue,” it said.
Plaintiff Redoak Communications and defendant Amazon “settled their respective claims for relief and defenses asserted in this litigation” in which Redoak alleged Amazon was selling unlicensed VHS, DVD and Blu-ray copies online of the horror film Just Before Dawn, said their stipulation of dismissal Wednesday (docket 9:23-cv-80008) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in West Palm Beach. The parties asked the court to dismiss with prejudice Redoak’s claims against Amazon, and to assert parties will bear their own attorneys’ fees and court costs. U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra granted those requests in a signed order Wednesday. Amazon’s March 1 counterclaims asserted Redoak’s infringement allegations were barred by the first-sale doctrine, but Amazon dismissed those counterclaims June 30 (see 2307030010).
U.S. District Judge John Koeltl for Southern New York in Manhattan granted his 10th deadline extension to Aug. 11 to the parties in the lawsuit in which four book publishers were granted summary judgment March 24 to thwart the Internet Archive from scanning print copies of physical books and lending the digital copies to users of IA’s website without the publishers’ permission (see 2303270006). The judge originally gave the parties an April 7 deadline to submit a proposal for the appropriate procedure to determine the judgment to be entered in the case. In each of the last several deadline extension requests, the parties told the judge they were “cautiously optimistic” there would be no further requests. Koeltl’s handwritten order Friday (docket 1:20-cv-04160) said there would be “no further extensions.”
Cisco and Poly seek an order from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissing with prejudice Cisco’s trade secrets misappropriation appeal against Poly, said their stipulated motion Friday (docket 23-15590). The parties agreed each side will bear its own costs and fees on appeal, said the motion. The parties also stipulated to dismissal with prejudice of the underlying case in the Northern District of California, it said. Cisco alleged Wilson Chung, its former hardware and software architect, improperly kept “substantial Cisco confidential information” for the Cisco 730 headset and the Webex Desk Pro when he left Cisco in 2019 to join Poly, then disclosed those trade secrets to other Poly employees (see 2304220002). Cisco moved last week to dismiss its appeal against Chung (see 2307270029).
Cisco seeks to dismiss with prejudice Wilson Chung from its trade secrets misappropriation appeal against Poly, said its motion Wednesday (docket 23-15590) in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The parties agreed to bear their own fees and costs, said the motion. Cisco had alleged Chung, its former hardware and software architect, improperly kept “substantial Cisco confidential information” for the Cisco 730 headset and the Webex Desk Pro when he left Cisco in 2019 to join Poly, then disclosed those trade secrets to other Poly employees (see 2304220002). Cisco’s appeal against Poly remains pending.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Dustin Howell denied Grande Communications Networks’ motion to stay execution of judgment in a copyright infringement lawsuit by Universal Music Group (UMG) and other labels, said his Tuesday order (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. Grande sought to vacate a Nov. 3 jury verdict awarding UMG and other plaintiffs $46.8 million in damages resulting from Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works. Howell granted Grande’s conditional cross-motion for writ of execution contained in its opposition to Grande’s motion, it said. If Grande fails to secure a bond within 14 days of the order, a writ of execution should be issued and served by the U.S. Marshals Service to satisfy the judgment and costs of Grande, subject to execution by law, the order said.
Beatles rights holders Apple Corps and Subafilms “satisfied the requirements” for a preliminary injunction to enjoin 63 defendants from trafficking in counterfeit Beatles goods on the internet (see 2307200048), said an order signed Friday (docket 0:23-cv-60769) by U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith for Southern Florida in Fort Lauderdale. The plaintiffs submitted “sufficient evidence” showing each defendant infringed at least one or more of the Beatles marks, said the order. The court concludes that Apple Corps and Subafilms “have a strong probability of proving at trial that consumers are likely to be confused” by the defendants’ promotion and sales of the counterfeits or “colorable imitations” of the Beatles marks, it said. The infringement will likely cause the plaintiffs “to suffer immediate and irreparable injury” if a preliminary injunction isn’t granted, it said.
A mediation status report is due Aug. 8 in Cisco’s trade secret misappropriation appeal against Poly and its hardware and software architect Wilson Chung, said a 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court order Tuesday (docket 23-15590). Under the court’s newly amended briefing schedule, Cisco’s opening brief is due Sept. 27, and the appellees’ answering brief Oct. 27, said the order. Cisco’s appeal asserts the district court erred when it granted summary judgment to Poly and Chung, and when it denied Cisco's motions for spoliation sanctions (see 2305010007). Cisco alleges Chung improperly kept “substantial Cisco confidential information” for the Cisco 730 headset and the Webex Desk Pro when he left Cisco in 2019 to join Poly, then disclosed those trade secrets to other Poly employees (see 2304220002).