The Court dismissed this action for copyright infringement. The case related to musical works for the TaL AM curriculum. The parties agreed that Pinto owns the copyright, however, the defendants argued that Pinto gave permission to use the music as part of the contract for his services.
The Court held that Pinto bears the burden of proving he did not consent, as he is the party seeking to establish infringement. The Court considered the evidence and held that it established that he consented to and actively facilitated the use of his music. Thus, the Court held there was no copyright infringement. Damages were considered in the alternative.