Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Filing Time for Copyright Suits Bars Profit Claim
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decided that the three-year federal statute of limitations for copyright suits, rather than a longer state limitations period for accounting actions, applied to a complaint for a portion of profits from figurines, including 'The Merry Wanderer,' derived from the book 'Das Hummel-Buch.' Cambridge Literary Properties Ltd. V. W. Goebel Porzellanfabrik G.m.b.H. & Co. KG, 06-2339.
The appeals court noted: 'Cambridge did not seek an adjudication of its [copyright] ownership rights before seeking whatever remedy it may have if it has any ownership rights. ' Rather, the complaint attempts to evade the issue of whether Cambridge has any ownership rights by simply asserting that Cambridge is a co-owner and then alleging that Cambridge, as a co-owner, is entitled under state law to an accounting and equitable trust.'
The court continued: 'Whether Cambridge is a co-owner in turn depends, on the facts of this case, upon the federal Copyright Act. This in turn requires that Cambridge have asserted its ownership claims within that statute's limitations period. The congressional intent that the Act's limitations period applies to claims of ownership under the Act may not be undercut by Cambridge's subterfuge.'
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decided that the three-year federal statute of limitations for copyright suits, rather than a longer state limitations period for accounting actions, applied to a complaint for a portion of profits from figurines, including 'The Merry Wanderer,' derived from the book 'Das Hummel-Buch.' Cambridge Literary Properties Ltd. V. W. Goebel Porzellanfabrik G.m.b.H. & Co. KG, 06-2339.
The appeals court noted: 'Cambridge did not seek an adjudication of its [copyright] ownership rights before seeking whatever remedy it may have if it has any ownership rights. ' Rather, the complaint attempts to evade the issue of whether Cambridge has any ownership rights by simply asserting that Cambridge is a co-owner and then alleging that Cambridge, as a co-owner, is entitled under state law to an accounting and equitable trust.'
The court continued: 'Whether Cambridge is a co-owner in turn depends, on the facts of this case, upon the federal Copyright Act. This in turn requires that Cambridge have asserted its ownership claims within that statute's limitations period. The congressional intent that the Act's limitations period applies to claims of ownership under the Act may not be undercut by Cambridge's subterfuge.'
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.