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 173

Judge finds that Apple conspired to raise e-book prices
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 12 2013

On July 10, 2013, Judge Denise Cote of the Southern District of New York issued a 160-page opinion holding that Apple conspired with five book


Second Circuit refuses to enjoin Aereo’s internet streaming of broadcast television
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • May 31 2013

Addressing the legality of a streaming TV service that provides internet-streaming of broadcast television programming, the U.S. Court of Appeals for


KSR based renewed motion on obviousness is a winner
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 26 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court grant of a post-KSR renewed summary judgment on obviousness (after denying a pre-KSR motion


“Objectionable material” under CDA means more than just porn
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 31 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has confirmed that the safe harbor provisions of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) apply to screening or blocking software and cover more then just pornography; they cover spyware as well


Copyright registrations can be invalidated based on intentional misrepresentations of originality
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 31 2009

Addressing the inter-related issues of cyberpiracy, copyright infringement and trademark infringement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that a website was owned by the employer but the copyright was invalid because the employer misrepresented the former employee’s contribution to that website


Webcasting music services not “interactive” when users cannot directly control the songs they hear
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 28 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court judgment that an internet radio service was not an “interactive service” within the meaning of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and hence was not liable for copyright infringement for failure to pay license fees


Video-sharing website protected by DMCA safe harbor
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 30 2009

In 2008, the video-sharing website Veoh.com (Veoh) won two notable decisions under the “safe harbor” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA


Statutory damages: foreign works and the U.S. live broadcast exemption
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 16 2009

In a class action led by the Football Association Premier League (FAPL) and U.S. music publishers Bourne against YouTube and its owners Google (The FAPL v YouTube Inc. (US District Court Southern District of New York)) filed on 4 May 2007, a U.S. District Court judge held that, because the FAPL did not register its broadcasts of Premier League matches with the US Copyright Office, it cannot claim statutory damages under the US Copyright Act against YouTube in respect of allegedly copyright infringing material uploaded by users to the video sharing site


A combination of non-conclusory factual allegations satisfies Twombly for a Sherman Act 1 claim and can proceed to trial
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 28 2010

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently reversed a district court decision dismissing a complaint alleging the defendants conspired to fix prices of digital music in violation of the Sherman Act 1


eBay not liable for sales of counterfeit Tiffany jewelry
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • April 28 2010

Upholding a district court’s 2008 ruling that eBay was not liable for trademark infringement based on sales of counterfeit Tiffany & Co. jewelry on eBay’s website, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that an online service provider must possess more than a general knowledge or reason to know that its service is being used to sell counterfeit goods in order to impose contributory trademark infringement liability