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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 100

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


Arrow Productions, Ltd v. The Weinstein Company LLC
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • September 1 2014

District court dismisses copyright and trademark infringement claims of copyright owner of 1972 pornographic film Deep Throat, holding that


Dunn v. DreamWorks Animation SKG, Inc.
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • May 10 2013

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment in favor of defendant DreamWorks Animation on plaintiff’s breach of implied-in-fact contract claim


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


Ortiz v. Guitian Brothers Music, Inc
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • August 5 2009

In a copyright infringement suit involving a movie soundtrack, court holds (1) a nonexclusive license can be oral; (2) where the dispute turns on whether there is a license at all, the burden is on the alleged infringer to prove the existence of the license; (3) absent consideration, a nonexclusive license is revocable; and (4) by instituting a copyright infringement action, plaintiff revoked any license that may have existed between the parties


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


Vargas, et al v Pfizer, Inc, et al
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • November 11 2009

In a copyright infringement action, the Second Circuit affirms summary judgment for defendants because plaintiffs’ expert reports and testimony asserting striking similarity were both internally and externally inconsistent and were insufficient to create a genuine issue of fact


Capitol Records, LLC, et al. v. Videoegg, Inc., et al.
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • March 18 2009

The district court held that California-based defendant Hi5 Networks, which operates a social networking web site where allegedly infringing video files are posted, had sufficient contacts with New York to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and then granted the defendant’s motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California


Arista Records LLC, et al v Usenet.com, Inc, et al
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • July 8 2009

In copyright infringement action against file sharing service, court holds defendants directly infringed plaintiffs’ copyrights in their sound recordings and defendants are liable for vicarious and contributory infringement and inducement to infringe; court grants in part plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions for discovery abuse and prevents defendants from asserting DMCA safe harbor defense


Briarpatch Limited LP, et al. v. Phoenix Pictures, Inc., et al.
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • March 11 2009

The Second Circuit held that plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment and copyright infringement claims against Phoenix Pictures and Mike Medavoy failed because plaintiffs did not hold legal title to copyrights in the screenplay The Thin Red Line