Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
"There are no small roles, only small actors." — Konstantin Stanislavski
Paraphrasing the famous line from the father of modern acting technique, in establishing the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), the Copyright Office effectively declared that there are no small copyrights, only small copyright infringement claims. Time will tell whether this new stage will serve as a well-respected and well-run forum for copyright owners, seeking redress (perhaps a summer "Shakespeare in the Park" to continue shamelessly flogging this analogy) or the legal equivalent of a cruise ship dinner theater. But regardless of the eventual reputation of the CCB, copyright holders would be well advised to familiarize themselves with this new forum for resolving copyright infringement claims and to consider its benefits and potential downsides in bringing or defending copyright infringement actions.
Congress passed the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act (CASE Act) in December 2020. The CASE Act provided for the Copyright Office to establish the CCB, a three-member tribunal, to resolve certain copyright disputes that involve up to $30,000 in total damages, and any statutory damages are limited to $15,000 per work infringed. (The CCB offers an even more streamlined process called a "smaller claims proceeding" if the claimant is seeking $5,000 or less in monetary relief (excluding attorneys' fees and costs.) The proceedings before the CCB are entirely voluntary. Both parties must agree to participate. If the parties agree to participate, the CCB can consider a number of claims, including for infringement of one of the exclusive rights in the Copyright Act (see, 17 U.S.C. §106). The CCB is prohibited from hearing a number of claims, but most notably:
Once the parties have agreed to proceed before the CCB, the matter will move forward rapidly. The respondent will file a response to the claim. Discovery will begin with the parties required to use the CCB's standard interrogatories and document requests (Good cause will have to be shown to the CCB to have additional relevant discovery, including requests for admission.). No depositions are allowed. Pre-discovery and post-discovery conferences are conducted virtually. There is no formal motion practice. As with motion practice, there are no formal rules of evidence followed by the CCB. Once discovery is completed, the proceedings before the CCB are conducted by means of written submission, hearings, and conferences carried out through telecommunications or video — no in-person attendance is required. In reaching a determination, the CCB can consider: 1) documentary and other nontestimonial evidence; and 2) testimonial evidence. (A request for a review of determination by the Register of Copyrights requires an additional fee.)
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
Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.
This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.
Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.