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 97

MDY Industries, LLC v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. et al.

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

Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (Blizzard) is the creator and operator of the popular online computer game World of Warcraft (WoW

Gary Friedrich Enterprises LLC, et al v Marvel Entertainment, inc, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 12 2010

Court adopts magistrate judge’s recommendation and grants defendants’ partial motion to dismiss Lanham Act and state law claims relating to plaintiffs’ “Ghost Rider” characters and story; court holds that state law claims for “reverse passing off” and tortious interference with business expectancy are pre-empted by the Copyright Act

Browne v. McCain, et al.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 4 2009

Singer-songwriter Jackson Browne brought claims for copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement and false association or endorsement under the Lanham Act against Senator John McCain, the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Ohio Republican Party (ORP) for the alleged improper use of Browne’ song Running on Empty in a McCain presidential campaign commercial

TMTV Corporation v. Mass Productions, Inc

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • Puerto Rico, USA
  • -
  • April 8 2009

The United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico held that pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(5), the defendants in a copyright infringement case based on the unauthorized production of infringing derivative works aired via television were able to credit the settlement award sum paid to the plaintiff in a prior copyright case arising from the same injury from the damages set by the jury in the current case

Andersen v. Atlantic Recording Corporation, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 12 2010

Court grants in part and denies in part defendant record companies’ motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action against record companies for, inter alia, abuse of legal process and negligence, relating to record companies’ alleged conduct after they filed a copyright infringement action against plaintiff

DVD Copy Control Association, Inc. v. Kaleidescape, Inc.

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

California Court of Appeal reverses trial court’s decision and holds that defendant, who licensed CSS technology from plaintiff DVD CCA and developed a home entertainment system that allows a user to play a movie without the physical DVD, was bound by the General Specifications provided by plaintiff, even though that document was not specifically referenced in the DVD CCA standard license agreement

Sony BMG Music Entertainment, et al. v. Tenenbaum

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 5 2009

In copyright infringement action involving peer-to-peer file sharing, court grants plaintiff record companies’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of defendant’s fair use defense and jury awards plaintiffs $675,000 for willful infringement of 30 copyrighted works

Milne, et al. v. Stephen Slesinger, Inc.

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 7 2009

The district court grants Disney’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing Slesinger’s copyright, trademark and trade dress infringement claims relating to the Winnie the Pooh characters; the court also grants Disney’s motion for summary adjudication of Slesinger’s claims based on judicial estoppel

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

Harrell v. Van Der Plas, et al

  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 18 2009

Court grants a discretionary award of substantial attorney’s fees to plaintiff author in an action for copyright infringement because defendant publishers’ defense was “objectively unreasonable” and an award is consistent with the purpose of the Copyright Act