e-Commerce Docket Sheet

A conversion claim against a software licensee based on allegations of unauthorized copying of the licensed source code is not cognizable because neither copyrights nor the software at issue are subject to conversion under Pennsylvania law. Apparel Business Systems, LLC v. Tom James Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26313 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 28, 2008). The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant on the conversion and copyright claims, concluding that the plaintiff lacked standing because it failed to establish that it owns the software copyrights at issue or make a cognizable conversion claim under state law. The court found that copyrights are not the kind of intangible rights that customarily merge in a particular document because the rights associated with copyright ownership are not embodied in the physical paper of the copyright registration, but arise as soon as the work is fixed in a tangible medium. The court also held that software is not the type of property subject to a conversion claim, because it was doubtful that the copied code amounted to chattel or deprived the plaintiff of the use of its software, as it was not the case that 'the defendants carried off a disk containing the plaintiff's program and refused to give it back.'