Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The first line of defense in most copyright infringement actions revolves around the question of “access” ' namely, whether the defendant had a reasonable possibility of viewing or hearing the plaintiff's work such that the defendant could have copied it illegally. Absent some direct proof that the defendant actually copied the plaintiff's work ' evidence that typically is not present ' a plaintiff will attempt to prove such copying indirectly by establishing that a defendant had access to the plaintiff's work and that the defendant's work is “substantially similar” to the plaintiff's.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has made it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove access. Specifically, in the Second Circuit's view, a company's “bare corporate receipt” of a plaintiff's work is insufficient proof of access.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.