Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) and eight music publishers sued Get Smashed Radio Broadcasting Network, and several of its executives Thursday, for copyright infringement (docket 1:23-cv-01720), said a complaint Thursday in U.S. District Court for Colorado in Denver. Plaintiffs allege KMZK(FM) Clifton, serving the Grand Junction, Colorado, area, willfully infringed their copyrights four times based on their unauthorized public performances of musical compositions from the BMI collection. BMI contacted defendants over 10 times since August 2021 by phone, mail and email – including cease and desist notices -- in an effort to “educate” the defendants about their obligations under the Copyright Act and their need to buy a license for public performance of musical compositions in the BMI repertoire, it said. In another case (docket 2:23-cv-01229), BMI, with 16 other music copyright holders, sued Bonfire Craft Kitchen, in Surprise, Arizona, for 11 claims of willful copyright infringement of their music from BMI’s library. BMI contacted the restaurant over 40 times since September 2020, informing them they must immediately cease all use of BMI-licensed music, said the July 3 complaint. In both lawsuits, plaintiffs seek an order enjoining the defendants from infringing musical works licensed by BMI, plus statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and legal costs.
The parties in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act complaint brought against GitHub, Microsoft and OpenAI agree a jury trial would last 13 days but disagree when it should be scheduled, said a joint Rule 26(f) report Wednesday (docket 4:22-cv-06823) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland in advance of a July 11 case management conference. The plaintiffs are five John Does who are GitHub users and posted code on GitHub under one or more of the platform’s “suggested licenses.” They allege the defendants, all AI system developers, violated their rights by using their code to “train” GitHub Copilot and OpenAI’s Codex without following the terms of the applicable open-source licenses and without other permission. They further allege the defendants continue to violate their rights through the distribution and operation of Copilot and Codex. The defendants deny they violated any of the plaintiffs’ rights, and moved to dismiss all the claims. The plaintiffs are proposing a trial date of Sept. 29, 2025, said the report. The defendants are proposing Feb. 4, 2026, it said.
Plaintiff Charming Beats dismissed a copyright infringement suit against Penguin Random House, said a Friday notice (docket 1:23-cv-03946) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan. The music publisher alleged the book publisher created a YouTube video ad using a Charming Beats’ copyrighted track without authorization (see 2305120031). Plaintiffs will pay their own legal costs, it said.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Dustin Howell set a 90-minute Zoom hearing for July 25 at 10 a.m. CDT on defendant Grande Communications Networks’ opposed motion to stay execution of judgment and its motion for a waiver of bond, said a Thursday order (see docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. Grande, seeking to vacate a Nov. 3 jury verdict awarding Universal Music Group and other music labels $46.8 million in damages for Grande’s willful contributory infringement of 1,403 copyrighted works, said Wednesday a requirement that it post a bond pending its appeal of the lawsuit is a “punitive measure that would serve only to enrich the company that issues the bond.” In its Wednesday reply in support of its motion for stay and the bond waiver, Grande said it presented a “sworn declaration” with evidence showing it can draw on a $455 million revolving line of credit through at least 2025 to satisfy the judgment. “That is more than enough to show that it would be a waste of money to require Grande to spend $4 million per year on a bond,” it said.
Both sides want oral argument in Yout’s 2nd U.S. Circuit Court appeal against the Recording Industry Association of America, said separate signed statements filed Thursday by counsel for Yout and the RIAA (docket 22-2760). Yout’s 2nd Circuit opening brief argued the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut “improperly” granted the RIAA’s motion to dismiss Yout’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act complaint, “erroneously concluding” that Yout’s YouTube-ripping software platform was a circumvention tool (see 2302030005). Yout can’t “plausibly plead” it doesn’t violate the statute, said RIAA’s answering brief (see 2305050001).
U.S. District Judge David Ezra for Western Texas in Austin denied Grande Communications Networks’ Feb. 27 renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial in its effort to vacate a Nov. 3 jury verdict awarding major record labels $46.8 million in damages for Grande’s secondary copyright infringement (see 2303010018), said Ezra’s signed order Thursday (docket 1:17-cv-00365). The labels argued, and the jury agreed, that Grande ignored the direct infringement of its internet subscribers. The plaintiff record companies “provided sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that Grande materially contributed to its users’ direct infringement by failing to terminate users after learning of their specific, often repeated, infringement,” said Ezra’s order. “Accordingly, judgment as a matter of law is not proper on this point,” it said. “Neither Grande’s legal nor evidentiary arguments warrant judgment as a matter of law or a new trial.”
BMI contacted Palm Bay, Florida, restaurant The Shack Riverfront over 60 times since October 2020 by phone, mail and email about the need to buy a license for public performance of music in the BMI portfolio, said a Thursday copyright infringement lawsuit (docket 6:23-cv-00857) in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Orlando. In the seven-claim suit, BMI and eight music publishers allege the restaurant publicly performs musical compositions without authorization. Among the letters it sent were cease and desist notices giving the establishment formal notice that it must immediately stop use of all BMI-licensed music, the complaint said. BMI seeks orders that the restaurant is enjoined from infringing BMI-licensed music and that it must pay statutory damages and attorneys’ fees, it said.
Eight copyright infringement lawsuits by adult video distributor Strike 3 Holdings allege “John Doe” Comcast Cable customers infringed its movies over an extended period of time. The lawsuits, filed in U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia in Atlanta Wednesday, listed the Does’ IP addresses and informed them their internet service providers could identify them through the address if they don’t stop pirating and sharing content via BitTorrent software. The eight defendants infringed videos 30-248 (docket 1:23-cv-02100) times, said the complaints. Strike 3 seeks an order that defendants must delete and permanently remove digital media files of its works on each computer they own, plus infringing copies of the works on their computers or in their possession, said the complaints. The company also seeks statutory damages per infringed work plus attorneys’ fees and legal costs.
Defendant Grande Communications’ request to extend the time it has to post a bond to 14 days is “meritless,” said Universal Music Group’s Tuesday reply in support of its conditional cross-motion for writ of execution (docket 1:17-cv-00365) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. Plaintiffs UMG and other music labels want to ensure they can proceed with collecting the judgment amount if the court denies the motion by Grande to waive the supersedeas bond requirement, and if Grande fails to obtain a bond, said the reply. The music labels were awarded $46.8 million in the copyright infringement case involving Grande internet subscribers. Parties typically have 30 days from judgment entry to obtain and post a supersedeas bond, said plaintiffs' reply; as a “courtesy,” they proposed that Grande be given seven additional days from the denial of its waiver motion to post one. Grande’s reasoning for an extension was that it may have to submit more financial information to bond issuers, which “could take some time,” but it “has already had two months beyond the 30-day period” provided in Rule 62 to submit the information necessary to obtain a bond, plaintiffs said. Grande’s request for more time “is simply [its] latest effort to complicate the supersedeas bond process and delay its obligation to obtain a bond like any other defendant who loses at trial,” said the reply. The music labels requested (see 2304070033) an additional $13 million in March for attorneys’ fees of $5.2 million, plus $7.4 million in prejudgment interest and about $200,000 in expert costs on the jury’s verdict that Grande’s copyright infringement was “willful.”
Amazon Studios, Simon Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate copied characters, storylines and images from plaintiff Demetrious Polychron, alleges a Friday copyright infringement lawsuit (docket 2:23-cv-02831) in U.S. District Court for Western California in Los Angeles. Polychron, a Los Angeles resident, asserts the defendants infringed his copyrighted work in the TV series The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (ROP). Polychron received a copyright for his work, The Fellowship of the King (TFOTK), Nov. 21, 2017, alleges the complaint. The copyright infringement suit, which also names then-Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and “Does 1-100,” alleges Polychron made several attempts to reach J.R.R. Tolkien’s grandson Simon Tolkien, asking for review of his manuscript but received no response. Two years later, Polychron retained counsel to contact the Tolkien Estate and related entities, giving detailed descriptions of his book “with request for review and collaboration.” Defendants’ counsel “rebuffed any attempt at collaboration” the next day. A few weeks later, Polychron delivered a copy of the TFOTK manuscript, identified with a copyright symbol, to Tolkien’s Santa Barbara, Calif., home, “hoping he would review the manuscript and reconsider collaboration,” the complaint said. About three weeks later, he requested return of the manuscript and advised Tolkien he would publish it, plus six more books in the series. Amazon Studios and The Tolkien Estate agreed to create ROP in November 2017; the Tolkien Estate paid Amazon Studios $250 million for rights to the series “that ultimately copied Polychron’s book” and has earned defendants more since its release, the complaint alleges. Despite inspiration from Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, Polychron developed “a wholly original book and concept” for his works that “compose as much as one-half of the 8-episode series as release and published by Defendants.” In addition, defendants “copied images that match the book cover and descriptions as created in the book as authored by Polychron,” it said. Defendants have since, “in blatant disregard for their infringing use of Polychron’s creation,” registered seven copyrighted works in the ROW series, it said. Plaintiff seeks an injunction against alleged copyright infringement, abandonment of cited copyright registrations, damages due to unfair trade practices, profits and advantages not less than $250 million, plus legal costs.