[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption |
Date: |
Tue, 04 May 2010 16:08:09 -0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 3/9/2010 5:51 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
The CAFC vacated, not reversed. Accordingly, on remand, the district
court determined that the injunction shall be denied on other grounds as
well.
The District Court said:
<http://jmri.org/k/docket/395.pdf>
2. Copyright Damages Are Available to Plaintiff.
...
Although it is undisputed that Plaintiff distributed the copied
work on the Internet at no cost, there is also evidence in the
record attributing a monetary value for the actual work performed
by the contributors to the JMRI project. (See Declaration of
Victoria K. Hall in support of opposition, Ex. F (expert report
of Michael A. Einhorn).)2 Because there are facts in the record
which may establish a monetary damages figure, the Court finds
Plaintiff has made a showing sufficient to establish the existence
of a dispute of fact regarding the monetary value of Plaintiff’s
work for purposes of his copyright claim. Accordingly, Defendants’
motion for summary judgment on this basis is denied.
...
2. Copyright Infringement Claim.
To prevail on his claim for copyright infringement, Plaintiff must
show he owns a valid copyright and that Defendants reproduced
protected elements of the copyrighted work. See Feist, 499 U.S. at
361. The uncontroverted evidence establishes that Plaintiff is the
owner of the decoder definition files which are the subject of the
copyright infringement claim. (Declaration of Robert Jacobsen in
support of motion, Ex. B.) The evidence summarized by this Court
with reference to Defendants’ motion establishes the originality,
and therefore, the copyrightability, of the subject work. Again, the
Court is unpersuaded that Plaintiff cannot prove damages. For the
same reasons discussed supra, the copied files remain in the
Defendants’ product as distributed and therefore constitute a basis
for a claim for copyright infringement. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on his copyright cause of
action as to liability, but not as to damages.
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, (continued)
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04