|
Citation |
Format |
Size |
Copyright Act of 1976 |
17 U.S.C. § ____ (2000) |
PDF |
0.99mb |
This is the basic document for all US copyright issues. |
Digital Millennium Copyright Act |
17 U.S.C. § 512 (1998) |
HTML |
33kb |
This is the DMCA section concerning Internet service provider liability. The sections concerning
encryption and digital rights management are at 17 U.S.C. § 1201 et seq., and are best
referred to in the complete Act. |
|
Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998 |
H.R. Rep. 105-551 pt. 1
H.R. Rep. 105-551 pt. 2
H.R. Rep. 105-796
S. Rep. 105-190
|
PDF PDF PDF PDF |
267kb 439kb 307kb 399kb |
The DMCA covered two significant aspects: encryption and digital rights management, and limitations
on liability for internet service providers. The Senate Report is much closer to the final version
of the bill. |
|
United States Supreme Court |
Campbell aka Skyywalker v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. |
510 U.S. 569 (1994) |
HTML |
73kb |
Better known as the "2Live Crew" or "Pretty Woman" case. A commercial parody can qualify as fair use
under 17 U.S.C. § 107, even when permission for the use was requested and refused. |
Eldred v. Ashcroft |
___ U.S. ___ (2003) |
HTML |
|
The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, which extended the copyright terms of both
existing and future works by twenty years, is within Congress's constitutional powers. Note: The
link is at present offsite to the excellent services of Cornell's Legal Information Institute. The
link goes to the syllabus (Reporter of Decisions's summary) in HTML format, and allows one to
obtain both PDF and somewhat shaky HTML copies of the various parts of this decision. |
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Services Co., Inc. |
499 U.S. 340 (1991) |
HTML |
55kb |
Only original material is eligible for copyright protection. An alphabetical listing, such as the white
pages of a telephone directory, does not qualify, because it does not reflect any originality in
selection, arrangement, or presentation of factual material. |
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. |
523 U.S. 340 (1998) |
HTML |
45kb |
Although the Copyright Act does not statutorily provide for a jury trial when statutory damages are
at issue, the Seventh Amendment does. |
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc. |
510 U.S. 517 (1994) |
HTML |
57kb |
The standards for awarding attorney's fees to prevailing litigants apply equally, whether the prevailing
party was the plaintiff or defendant at trial. |
New York Times, Inc. v. Tasini |
533 U.S. 483 (2001) |
PDF |
130kb |
A CD-ROM or
online database of previously published freelance material does not qualify for the reissue privilege
under 17 U.S.C. § 201(c), and may constitute an infringement. |
Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. |
508 U.S. 49 (1993) |
PDF |
214kb |
Litigation cannot be characterized as a "sham" (therefore forfeiting the "government petition" privilege
under antitrust law)
unless it is objectively baseless. In this case, Columbia's copyright infringement suit was not
objectively baseless, and therefore did not violate antitrust law through misuse of copyright to
unlawfully restrain competition. |
Quality King Dist., Inc. v. L'Anza Research Int'l, Inc. |
523 U.S. 135 (1998) |
PDF |
153kb |
The first sale doctrine (17 U.S.C. § 109(a)) applies to imported materials, and prevents
a finding of infringement for violation of a US territorial right via importation of materials lawfully
obtained outside the US. |
United States Circuit Courts of Appeal |
Ellison v. America Online, Inc. |
357 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2004) |
PDF |
85kb |
ISPs must fulfill the requirements of § 512(i) before claiming the safe harbor provided by the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act, including providing accurate
and up-to-date contact information as required by § 512(c). Reverses trial court decision
on this point. For more details, see the ScrivenersError.com
page on this case. |
Fonovisa, Inc., v. Cherry Auction, Inc. |
76 F.3d 259 (9th Cir. 1996) |
HTML |
21kb |
An operator of a flea market that charges admission fees to independent vendors, but does not specify
the exact merchandise sold, may nonetheless be both contributorily and vicariously liable for copyright
infringement committed by those vendors. |
Worldwide Church of God, Inc., v. Philadelphia Church of God, Inc. |
227 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2000) |
HTML |
54kb |
A competing church may not claim either fair use or protection under the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, for wholesale copying of copyrighted scriptural materials. Extensive discussion
of fair use in a "noncommercial" context. |
United States District Courts |
Ellison v. Robertson et al. |
189 F. Supp. 2d 1051 (C.D. Cal. 2002) |
RTF |
86kb |
Reversed in part (Ellison v. America Online, Inc.see above)
USENET servers qualify for the safe harbor provided by the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act for transitory communications,
17 U.S.C. § 512(a). For more details, see the ScrivenersError.com
page on this case. |
Scholastic, Inc. v. Stouffer |
2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17531 (S.D.N.Y., Sep. 17) |
HTML |
73kb |
Nancy Stouffer may not maintain her claims of copyright and trademark infringement concerning
"Harry Potter" and "Muggles." Stouffer sanctioned $50,000 for litigation misconduct (fabrication of
evidence). |
|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
509 U.S. 579 (1993) |
PDF |
171kb |
Expert witnesses: The Federal Rules of Evidence (Fed. R. Evid. 702) provide that the judge rules
upon admissibility of expert testimony under the standard of whether the testimony, if credited, will
assist the trier of fact in resolving the factual matters at issue. Overrules the "general scientific
acceptability" test of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (1923), in federal court.
Expert opinion on similarity and on damages is usually required in contested copyright cases. |
General Electric, Inc. v. Joiner |
522 U.S. 136 (1997) |
PDF |
149kb |
Expert witnesses: Admission of expert testimony is under the abuse of discretion standard.
Expert opinion on similarity and on damages is usually required in contested copyright cases. |
National Treasury E'es Union, United States v. |
513 U.S. 454 (1995) |
HTML |
115kb |
Speech by government employees: Unconstitutional to restrict government employees (who are not
policymakers) from participating in or being compensated for speech unrelated to their official
duties. |
|