Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Establishing Copyright Damages When Party Moves for Summary Judgment
Section 504(b) of the Copyright Act allows a copyright owner to obtain both the owner's actual damages as well as an infringer's profits attributable to the infringed work that weren't included in the actual damages award. What are the burdens of proof when a copyright infringement plaintiff seeks this recovery after a pre-trial summary judgment motion has been filed? How does an expert's report work into this? These issues were recently examined in a lengthy opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Dash v. Mayweather, 12-1899. This article primarily discusses the court's analysis of the expert witness report.
The case involved a copyright infringement suit by musician Anthony Lawrence Dash that alleged his “Tony Gunz Beat (TGB)” track was used without his permission as the basis for entry music for boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. at two World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) events ' the pay-per-view Wrestlemania XXIV and on the weekly TV show RAW. The song that was broadcast was titled “Yep,” which added lyrics written by Mayweather and Cory Harris to Dash's beat track.
After Dash sued Mayweather and WWE in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, the parties stipulated that Dash had “adduced no evidence that the playing of the 'Yep' song at Wrestlemania XXIV or the Aug. 24, 2009 RAW show increased any of the WWE revenue streams ' beyond that which would have existed without the song 'Yep.'” In addition, Dash and the defendants filed a joint motion requesting the district court to rule on his '504 damages claim prior to a liability determination.
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
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.
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.
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?