Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The threat of enhanced damages, particularly in the hands of a jury, can have a considerable effect influencing the strategic conduct of litigation. Assuming some merit to a claim ' at least sufficient to withstand summary judgment ' the possibility of a verdict doubled or trebled or otherwise multiplied to deter or punish perceived willful, malicious conduct, perhaps representing many times the plaintiff's actual damages or the defendants' profits, can indeed be something of a gun to the head. To some plaintiffs seeking to vindicate a perceived wrong, the prospect of punitive damages can, of course also be something akin to the brass ring, adding extra incentive spurring pursuit of a verdict to the very end, even in a case that might otherwise settle.
To many practitioners, it is likely assumed that the sole monetary remedies under the Copyright Act are those specified in Section 504 of the statute, namely the copyright owner's provable losses and/or the infringer's profits, or, alternatively, statutory damages (which, by statutory formula, include possible stepped-up awards in cases of willful infringement). It was thus with some significance and perhaps surprise that on Aug. 30, 2004, in a slender decision of only seven paragraphs, Blanch v. Koons, 329 F. Supp.2d 568 (S.D.N.Y. 2004), a federal judge in New York (Louis Stanton) rendered a decision granting a motion to amend the complaint in a copyright case to allow the plaintiff to seek punitive damages (not simply enhanced statutory damages). As Judge Stanton's decision makes clear, his ruling is largely unprecedented.
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
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.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.