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 99

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


Jordan v. Sony BMG Music Entertainment Inc., et al
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • December 16 2009

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals holds that plaintiff was time-barred under the Copyright Act from suing for co-ownership of defendant’s copyright because more than three years had elapsed since defendant registered with the Copyright Office; court also holds that the copyright registration solely in defendant’s name was sufficient to put the plaintiff on constructive notice that defendant claimed sole ownership in the work


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


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


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


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


Lewinson v. Henry Holt and Company, LLC, et al
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2009

In copyright infringement action, court holds that plaintiff’s manuscript for a children’s story depicting children around the world saying “pacifier” in different languages and defendants’ children’s book depicting children around the world saying “peace” in different languages are not substantially similar


The Weinstein Company v. Smokewood Entertainment Group, LLC
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • October 7 2009

In a breach of contract action, the district court grants defendant producer’s motion to dismiss claims by The Weinstein Company, holding that parties’ oral negotiations for licensing and distribution rights to the motion picture Push, allegedly confirmed by an email exchange, do not constitute a writing that satisfies Section 204 of the Copyright Act


Janky v. Lake County Convention and Visitors Bureau
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • August 12 2009

The Seventh Circuit finds that a song was a joint work, as a matter of law, where a songwriter’s fellow band member recommended changes which accounted for ten percent of the copyrighted song’s lyrical content and was listed as a co-author on the copyright registration


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