Top 10 Copyright Cases for the month of April 2010

1. Salinger v. Colting, Docket No. 09-2878-cv, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8956, September 3, 2009, Argued, April 30, 2010, Decided

CORE TERMS:  injunction, preliminary injunction, patent, irreparable harm, fair use, likelihood of success, infringement, public interest, sequel, novel ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Salinger v. Colting

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Salinger v. Colting

2. Arista Records LLC v. Doe, Docket No. 09-0905-cv, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8879, November 20, 2009, Argued, April 29, 2010, Decided

CORE TERMS:  subpoena, copyrighted, music, file-sharing, network, copyright infringement, song, recording, declaration, infringement ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Arista Records LLC v. Doe

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Arista Records LLC v. Doe

3. Lapine v. Seinfeld, No. 09-4423-cv, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8778, April 28, 2010, Decided,  PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

CORE TERMS:  similarity, trademark, purees, dilution, cookbook, food, matter of law, copyright infringement, summary judgment, shushing ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Lapine v. Seinfeld

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Lapine v. Seinfeld

4. Bryant v. Media Right Prods., Docket No. 09-2600-cv, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8657, March 10, 2010, Argued, April 27, 2010, Decided

OVERVIEW:  Damages under 17 U.S.C.S. § 504(c)(1) for songwriters and their record label in a copyright infringement case were properly limited to one award for each album, not each song, because an album was a compilation, which was one work; finding that a wholesaler's infringement was innocent was not clear error and justified the minimal damages award.

CORE TERMS:  album, media, song, statutory damages, damage award, infringement, separately, digital, infringer, music ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Bryant v. Media Right Prods

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Bryant v. Media Right Prods

5. Estate of Hevia v. Portrio Corp., No. 09-1096, No. 09-1097, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8089, April 20, 2010, Decided

OVERVIEW:  Copyright infringement claims under 17 U.S.C.S. § 501 against defendants, including a designer's business partner, failed because the designer had granted an implied nonexclusive license to use architectural plans. Denial of defendants' request for attorneys' fees on bad-faith grounds was not an abuse of discretion.

CORE TERMS:  license, implied license, attorneys' fees, counterclaims, nonexclusive, copyrighted, permission, blueprints, summary judgment, partner ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Estate of Hevia v. Portrio Corp

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Estate of Hevia v. Portrio Corp

6. PhotoMedex, Inc. v. Irwin, No. 07-56672, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7640, June 4, 2009, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California, April 14, 2010, Filed

CORE TERMS:  laser, clearance, Lanham Act, excimer, cleared, misrepresentation, inventor, manufacturer, actionable, summary judgment ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of PhotoMedex, Inc. v. Irwin

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of PhotoMedex, Inc. v. Irwin

7. Stephens v. Hayes, No. 09-1259, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT,  10a0226n.06;, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7533; 2010 FED App. 0226N (6th Cir.), April 13, 2010, Filed,  NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.

CORE TERMS:  parental rights, official capacity, forma pauperis, judgments terminating, social workers, termination, state officials, summary judgment, collateral estoppel, res judicata effect ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Stephens v. Hayes

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Stephens v. Hayes

8. Tillman v. Newline Cinema, No. 09-1636, No. 09-1778, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7584, January 20, 2010, Argued, April 13, 2010, Decided,  PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

CORE TERMS:  summary judgment, attorney's fees, conspiracy theory, pro se, frivolous, pursued, script, sanctions order, civil rights claims, abuse of discretion ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Tillman v. Newline Cinema

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Tillman v. Newline Cinema

9. Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Novelty, Inc., No. 08-55795, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7585, October 5, 2009, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California, April 13, 2010, Filed,  PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

CORE TERMS:  toy, copter, handle, plane, sculptural, utilitarian, launcher, airplane, infringement, copyrightable ...

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Novelty, Inc

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Novelty, Inc

10. Martin v. Walt Disney Internet Group, No. 10-55005, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7449, April 5, 2010 ** , Submitted** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., April 12, 2010, Filed,  PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Martin v. Walt Disney Internet Group

Non-subscribers can use lexisOne's Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Martin v. Walt Disney Internet Group