Creative Protection

ASCAP v. MobiTV, Inc.

Appeal from the July 6, 2010, judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Denise Cote, District Judge), setting royalty for blanket public performance license for music in the ASCAP repertory that is embodied in television and radio content to be delivered to viewers and listeners using mobile telephones. In re Application of MobiTV, Inc., 712 F. Supp. 2d 206 (S.D.N.Y. 2010).

Affirmed.

Download ASCAP v. MobiTV, Inc.

Gaylord v. US

Frank Gaylord appeals from the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims awarding him $5,000 for the United States Postal Service’s copyright infringement of his statues. Because the trial court incorrectly limited Mr. Gaylord’s damages to the Postal Service’s highest past license payment and denied prejudgment interest, we vacate and remand for a determination of the market value of the Postal Service’s infringing use and an award of prejudgment interest.

Download Gaylord v. US

Suit accuses Harley of copyright infringement on images

By Rick Romell of the Journal Sentinel

A Milwaukee-area commercial artist is accusing Harley-Davidson Inc. of using his designs without paying him.

Wayne Wm. Peterson, of Muskego, filed suit this week in federal court against the motorcycle maker, alleging copyright infringement.

In his complaint, Peterson said that from the mid-'70s through the mid-2000s, Harley commissioned him to produce more than 600 pictorial, graphic, sculptural and other works. He said he did all the work as an independent contractor, and never was a Harley employee.

Peterson alleges that Harley has been improperly using two pieces of his work, most prominently an image of a flying eagle with its beak holding an unfurling banner bearing the company's name and the phrase, "Live to Ride, Ride to Live." Peterson secured a copyright on the eagle-and-banner image (although not on the phrase) in 1986.

Full story.

US v. Lam

A jury convicted appellants Chong Lam and Siu Yung Chan (collectively "Appellants") of conspiracy to traffic in counterfeit goods, trafficking in counterfeit goods, and smuggling goods into the United States. The counterfeiting convictions were based on the jury’s determination that a mark displayed on goods Appellants imported into the United States was a counterfeit of a trademark registered to fashion designer Burberry Ltd. ("Burberry"), depicting its signature plaid pattern (the "Burberry Check mark"). On appeal, Appellants advance various challenges to their convictions for trafficking in counterfeit goods under 18 U.S.C. § 2320(a). They also assert that certain comments made by prosecutors at trial necessitate a retrial. Because we find these arguments lacking in merit, we affirm.

Download US v. Lam

In re Pacific Pictures Corp.

We must decide whether a party waives attorney-client privilege forever by voluntarily disclosing privileged documents to the federal government.

Download In re Pacific Pictures Corp.