Mass Law Blog Update – Week Ending March 14, 2014

by Lee Gesmer on March 14, 2014

  • First Circuit holds that failure to register copyrights in underlying musical compositions dooms copyright infringement claims. Alecia v. Machete Music (link)
  • N. Dist. Cal. court holds that websites copy of photo of politician is protected by copyright fair use doctrine. Dhillon v. Does 1-10 (link)
  • The 9th Circuit has declared open season on the petition for rehearing or hear en banc in its decision in Garcia v. Google – anyone can file an amicus brief (link). This case has been the subject of massive criticism by the copyright community, and it seems likely that it is headed for en banc review.
  • Techdirt: Google Points Out That Even the Copyright Office Thinks Judge Kozinski’s ‘Innocence of Muslims’ Rule is Wrong. Techdirt sums up recent developments in Garcia v. Google, including the fact that the plaintiff has been unable to obtain a copyright registration (see first bullet above). (link)
  • Hearings of House Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet on March 13, 2014.  Topic this week was the DMCA (link)
  • Atlantic article, Our Best Weapon Against Revenge Porn: Copyright Law? (link)
  • Columbia Law Professor Jane Ginsburg (daughter of Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg), Aereo in International Perspective: Individualized Access and U.S. Treaty Obligations (link)

  • David Nimmer (Nimmer on Copyright) says Second Circuit got it wrong in Aereo case. Responds Aereo: “ouch” (link)
  • The courts are unable to agree on when an idea is “abstract,” and therefore ineligible for patent protection under the non-statutory “abstract idea” test. The Supreme Court will take up this issue again in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Internationalwhich is scheduled for oral argument on March 31st.  But, briefing is complete and Dennis Crouch summarizes the arguments on Patently-O. (link)
  • D. Mass. judge denied motion to dismiss claim against company hosting third-party web site reviews (mymovingreviews.com) under Communications Decency Act (CDA), on grounds that there is substantial basis to conclude that the defendants (not third parties) were the developers of the information at issue.  Moving and Storage, Inc. v. Panayotov (link)
  • E.D. Mich. judge struggles with copyright and trademark claims against a variety of high profile defendants (Sports Illustrated, Walmart, Getty Images) arising out of 1991 still photo of a moment in a football game between the U. of Michigan Wolverines and the Ohio State Buckeyes.  (link)
  • Week 7 CopyrightX – The Rights to Reproduce and Modify (link to Lecture 7.1)

 

Previous post:

Next post: