We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 138

Bridgeport Music, Inc, et al v UMG Recordings, Inc, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 11 2009

Sixth Circuit affirms a jury verdict which found defendants willfully infringed plaintiff’s musical composition copyright; court rejects defendants’ argument that district court erred in jury instructions about substantial similarity, fair use and willful infringement

Steele, et al. v. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 29 2009

Plaintiff Samuel Bartley Steele is a songwriter and musician who allegedly wrote a “love anthem” about the Boston Red Sox entitled Man I Really Love This Team (“the Steele Song”) and a “derivative” version of the song entitled Man I Really Love This Town, that removed specific references to the Red Sox (the “Derivative Song”

Ladd v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 2 2010

The California Court of Appeal holds that Warner Bros breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing owed to plaintiff, Alan Ladd Jr, a profit participant in several movies, when it allocated the same share of licensing fees to every movie in packages of films regardless of each movie's value

Cohen v. G&M Realty L.P.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 27 2013

In matter of first impression, district court denies preliminary injunction under federal Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) to graffiti artists

UMG Recordings, Inc., et al. v. Veoh Networks, Inc., et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 16 2009

Defendant Veoh operates an Internet-based service that allows users to share videos with others

Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 10 2010

In copyright infringement suit brought by the heir of an author of a screenplay that allegedly became the basis of the motion picture Raging Bull against the copyright owners of the picture, district court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on the equitable defense of laches where plaintiff had knowledge of the legal theories asserted in the action as early as 1990 and refrained from filing suit until 2009 because the picture was allegedly not yet profitable

RealNetworks, Inc, et al v DVD Copy Control Association, Inc, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 10 2010

RealNetworks settles with major motion picture studios and DVD CCA over its RealDVD software and agrees to have distribution of its software enjoined

Capitol Records, Inc., et al. v. Alaujan, et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 24 2009

In this copyright infringement action brought against several defendants for allegedly downloading sound recordings using a peer-to-peer network, one defendant filed a motion to dismiss in which he asserted that the statutory damages available to private parties under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 504(c) which range from $750 to $150,000 per infringement are so excessive and punitive in nature that they essentially convert his case into a criminal proceeding and violate his right to due process

Barclays Capital Inc., et al. v. Theflyonthewall.com

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 24 2010

After a bench trial, the district court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff financial institutions on their claims of copyright infringement and "hot news misappropriation" against online aggregator of financial information

Siegel, et al. v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 19 2009

District court holds that plaintiffs, heirs of one of the co-creators of the Superman character, successfully terminated certain prior grants in copyrights and recaptured the rights to several Superman-related works from the 1930s and 40s, including portions of Superman comic books and two weeks’ worth of daily newspaper strips; however, the court ruled that the remaining Superman material at issue in the litigation was created as a work made for hire under the Copyright Act of 1909, and that ownership of such material remains solely with defendants