WASHINGTON, D.C. — Nonprofit organizations The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Public Knowledge (PK) were among the interested parties that filed amicus curiae briefs with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 11 and 12 in support of Google LLC’s petition for rehearing en banc, arguing that a panel ruling over Google’s use of Java technology in its Android smartphone operating system ignored fair use case law and could have a detrimental impact on technological innovations (Oracle America Inc. v. Google LLC, Nos. 17-1118, -1202, Fed. Cir.).
NEW YORK — In a June 13 letter motion, plaintiffs’ attorneys requested a two-week extension to file objections to a June 8 New York federal magistrate judge’s recommendation that they be awarded a default judgment on just three of seven counts of copyright infringement (Conan Properties International LLC, et al. v. Ricardo Jové Sanchez, No. 17-162, E.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98631).
MIAMI — A plaintiff was granted leave to amend its copyright infringement complaint on June 11 by a Florida federal magistrate judge, to add various individuals as defendants, but a related request to allege that the individuals are liable for secondary infringement was rejected (43 North Broadway LLC v. Essential Media Group LLC, No. 17-24518, S.D. Fla., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97497).
OAKLAND, Calif. — One year after a YouTube user was denied certiorari on questions of fair use and good faith surrounding the takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a California federal magistrate judge announced in a June 6 minute entry that the parties in the 11-year old case had “reached in principle” a settlement of the remaining issues (Stephanie Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., et al., No. 4:07-cv-03783, N.D. Calif.).
LAS VEGAS — A November 2017 order that dismissed with prejudice allegations of copyright misuse, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage and false advertising by Oracle International Corp. will not be reconsidered, a Nevada federal judge ruled June 5 (Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle International Corp., No. 14-1699, D. Nev., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94585).
SAN FRANCISCO — Online video-filtering service provider VidAngel Inc. argues in a June 1 reply brief to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that its antitrust counterclaims in a copyright dispute were wrongly dismissed because it plausibly alleged a conspiracy by the plaintiff movie studios to boycott filtering services despite public demand for such services (Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. v. VidAngel Inc., No. 17-56665, 9th Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO — Allegations by the heir of an Egyptian composer that rapper Jay-Z, also known as Shawn Carter, improperly copied from “Khosara Khosara” in the “hook” of the hit song “Big Pimpin’” were properly rejected by a California federal judge, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 31 (Osama Ahmed Fahmy v. Jay-Z, et al., No. 16-55213, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 14334).
CHICAGO — An Illinois federal judge did not err in granting a romance novelist summary judgment on allegations of copyright infringement, in view of undisputed evidence that the accused work was completed before the plaintiff’s, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled June 1 (Kelly Rucker v. Donna Fasano, et al., No. 17-3608, 7th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 14575).
LOS ANGELES — In a May 21 ruling, a California federal judge found that direct and indirect copyright infringement allegations surrounding the hit song “Let It Go,” from the movie “Frozen,” must be dismissed with regard to any acts occurring before Nov. 23, 2014 — when the three-year statutory limitations period began under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 507(b) (Jaime Ciero v. The Walt Disney Company, et al., No. 17-8544, C.D. Calif.).
LOS ANGELES — In a 39-page order issued May 29, a California federal judge rejected efforts by the operators of alleged “bots” to obtain dismissal of copyright infringement allegations levied in connection with their mass purchase of tickets for live entertainment events (Ticketmaster L.L.C. v. Prestige Entertainment West Inc., et al., No. 17-7232, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89347).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 29 petition in the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Google LLC says “novel questions of exceptional importance” over the fair use of existing software interfaces merit en banc rehearing of a panel’s finding that Google’s use of certain Java code in its Android operating system infringed the copyrights of Oracle America Inc. (Oracle America Inc. v. Google LLC, Nos. 17-1118, -1202, Fed. Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a May 25 order, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals announced that an unidentified judge of the court has requested, sua sponte, a vote on en banc rehearing of an April ruling that a monkey lacks standing under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., to maintain an action for infringement (Naruto, a Crested Macaque, by and through his Next Friends, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. David John Slater, et al., No. 16-15469, 9th Cir.).
NEW ORLEANS — A copyright and trademark infringement plaintiff’s effort to establish jurisdiction in Louisiana based upon a defendant’s access of a computer server there was unsuccessful May 29, when a Louisiana federal judge found that it is unclear whether the access was without permission (Future World Electronics LLC v. Results HQ LLC, No. 17-17982, E.D. La., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88979).
CHICAGO — Gillian Flynn, author of the bestselling novel “Gone Girl” and screenplay of the same name, won dismissal May 21 of allegations that her work infringed a copyrighted screenplay titled “Out of the Blue” (Leslie Weller v. Gillian Flynn, et al., No. 17-8799, N.D. Ill., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84591).
SAN DIEGO — In two orders issued May 21, a California federal judge refused to issue a request that the Register of Copyrights reconsider registrations issued to Dr. Seuss Enterprises LP for “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!” (“Go!”) and “Sneetches” but granted a defendant judgment on the pleadings with regard to Seuss’ related allegations of trademark infringement (Dr. Seuss Enterprises LP v. ComicMix LLC, et al., No. 16-2779, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84986, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84985).
GREENBELT, Md. — A dispute between manufacturers of linens for use in the hospitality industry will proceed in light of a May 15 memorandum by a Maryland federal judge that deemed allegations of copyright and trade dress infringement adequately pleaded to survive a motion to dismiss (Garnier Thiebaut Inc. v. Castello 1935 Inc. and Richard William Campbell, No. 17-3632, D. Md., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83294).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The heirs of a famous rock concert promoter claim that an appeals court used the incorrect standard in determining the ownership of copyrights in concert posters that were created as a work-for-hire, they argue in an April 23 petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking reversal and remand to pursue infringement and conversion claims (Alexander Graham-Sult, et al., v. Nicholas Clainos, No. 17-1465, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Contending that an asset transfer to his former company did not include the copyright in a disputed software program, the software’s creator in an April 27 petition for certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify what type of documents satisfy the copyright transfer procedure outlined in Section 204(a) of the Copyright Act (Anthony Johnson v. Storix Inc., No. 17-1503, U.S. Sup.).
CHICAGO — In a May 8 decision, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld an Illinois federal judge’s determination that CareerBuilder LLC possessed an irrevocable, implied license to use a plaintiff’s copyrighted designs and was under no obligation to pay the plaintiff a renewal fee (LimeCoral Ltd. v. CareerBuilder LLC, No. 17-1733, 7th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12022).
NEW YORK — The operator of an online media-monitoring service saw its petition for rehearing denied May 14, as the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals declined without comment reconsideration of its finding that TVEyes Inc.’s service is not fair use and, thus, infringes Fox News Network LLC’s copyrighted content (Fox News Network LLC v. TVEyes Inc., No. 15-3885, 2nd Cir.).