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.


Refine your search

Content type



8 results found


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 23 Aug 2017

Hosseinzadeh v. Klein.

In an action for copyright infringement, DMCA violation and defamation over critical commentary on creative video posted on YouTube, district court


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 27 Jul 2011

Alexander v. Murdoch

District court grants dismissal of copyright infringement claim against creators and producers of Modern Family, finding that no reasonable jury could find substantial similarity between plaintiff’s pilot Loony Ben and ABC’s Modern Family.


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 16 Jun 2011

Smith v. Summit Entertainment LLC

District Court refuses to dismiss copyright owner’s claims for (1) wrongful assertion of copyright, (2) tortious interference with contract and (3) defamation, arising from defendant’s “take down” notices that allegedly falsely assert a copyright interest in plaintiff’s song.


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 12 May 2010

Andersen v. Atlantic Recording Corporation, et al

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.


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 24 Mar 2010

Cabell v. Zimmerman

Defendant’s improper takedown notice did not constitute copyright infringement where plaintiff alleged no affirmative copying of its work and defendant’s failure to investigate independently whether a video was infringing prior to sending the takedown notice did not constitute misrepresentation under 17 U.S.C. 512(f).


Loeb & Loeb LLP | USA | 29 Jul 2009

Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. v. Delsman

In this copyright infringement case, the court held that plaintiff’s use of copyrighted photographs was transformative for purposes of fair use, even though the photos were unaltered, because the photos were used for a fundamentally different purpose than that for which they were originally intended.

Previous page 1 Next page