Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Online Extra: Effie Film LLC Loses Attorney Fees Bid After Winning Copyright Suit
Judge J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied the Effie film production company's bid for attorney fees and costs in its declaratory action against author Eve Pomerance over the parties' scripts about relationships among three famous art-world figures. Effie Film LLC v. Pomerance, 11 Civ. 7087.
Judge Oetken had previously found no substantial similarity between the litigation parties' works. In his recent ruling, the district judge noted: '[T]he Court cannot conclude that Defendant acted unreasonably when she first indicated her copyright concerns to Plaintiff, thereby prompting Plaintiff to file a suit for declaratory judgment. Simply put, at that time, Defendant was not well positioned to predict how a court would approach copyright analysis in this case. Although the [court's earlier] Opinion concluded that there was virtually no substantial similarity between the Pomerance Works and the final version of the Effie screenplay, that conclusion rested on an effort to clarify existing doctrine. It also hinged in significant part on the exclusion of unprotectible historical facts and interpretations from the substantial similarity analysis ' a methodology that requires difficult judgment calls about the line between creative fictionalization and historical interpretation.'
Thus, Judge Oetken found, 'Given the scarce precedent in this field, it would not have been objectively unreasonable for Defendant to take a very different view of the degree to which the Original Effie Script infringed truly original content in the Pomerance Works.'
The district judge added that 'there is reason to believe that the Final Effie Script was modified, in part, to account for the very copyright issues at the heart of this litigation.'
Judge J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Judge Oetken had previously found no substantial similarity between the litigation parties' works. In his recent ruling, the district judge noted: '[T]he Court cannot conclude that Defendant acted unreasonably when she first indicated her copyright concerns to Plaintiff, thereby prompting Plaintiff to file a suit for declaratory judgment. Simply put, at that time, Defendant was not well positioned to predict how a court would approach copyright analysis in this case. Although the [court's earlier] Opinion concluded that there was virtually no substantial similarity between the Pomerance Works and the final version of the Effie screenplay, that conclusion rested on an effort to clarify existing doctrine. It also hinged in significant part on the exclusion of unprotectible historical facts and interpretations from the substantial similarity analysis ' a methodology that requires difficult judgment calls about the line between creative fictionalization and historical interpretation.'
Thus, Judge Oetken found, 'Given the scarce precedent in this field, it would not have been objectively unreasonable for Defendant to take a very different view of the degree to which the Original Effie Script infringed truly original content in the Pomerance Works.'
The district judge added that 'there is reason to believe that the Final Effie Script was modified, in part, to account for the very copyright issues at the heart of this litigation.'
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
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.