Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

March 28, 2005, Argued ; June 3, 2005, Decided ; June 3, 2005, Filed

File Name: 05a0243a.06

Nos. 02-6521; 03-5738

Opinion

 [****1866]   [*795]  AMENDED OPINION ON REHEARING 

 [***2]  RALPH B. GUY, JR., Circuit Judge. The court issued an initial opinion in these consolidated cases on September 7, 2004. Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 383 F.3d 390 (6th Cir. 2004). [**2]  Through an Order entered December 20, 2004, the full court denied the petition for rehearing en banc filed by No Limit Films and a panel rehearing was granted only with respect to the issues discussed in Section II of the opinion as amended. Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 401 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2004). After additional briefing and argument on rehearing, we adhere to our conclusions and amend the opinion to further clarify our reasoning.

Plaintiffs, Bridgeport Music, Inc., Westbound Records, Inc., Southfield Music, Inc., and Nine Records, Inc., appeal from several of the district court's findings with respect to the copyright infringement claims asserted against No Limit Films. 2 This action arises out of the use of a sample from the composition and sound recording "Get Off Your Ass and Jam" ("Get Off") in the rap song "100 Miles and Runnin'" ("100 Miles"), which was included in the sound track of the movie I Got the Hook Up (Hook Up). Specifically, Westbound appeals from the district court's decision to grant summary judgment to defendant on the grounds that the alleged infringement was de minimis and therefore not actionable. Bridgeport, while [**3]  not appealing from the summary judgment order, challenges instead the denial of its motion to amend the complaint to assert new claims of infringement based on a different song included in the sound track of Hook Up. Finally, Bridgeport, Southfield, and Nine Records appeal from the decision to award attorney fees and costs totaling $ 41,813.30 to No Limit Films under 17 U.S.C. § 505. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the district court's grant of summary judgment to No Limit on Westbound's claim of infringement of its sound recording copyright, but affirm the decision of the district court as to the award of attorney fees and the denial of Bridgeport's motion to amend.

The claims at issue in this appeal were originally asserted in an action filed on May 4, 2001, by the related entities Bridgeport Music, Southfield Music, [**4]  Westbound Records, and Nine Records, alleging nearly 500 counts against approximately 800 defendants for copyright infringement and various state law claims relating to the use of samples without permission in new rap recordings. In August 2001, the district court severed that original complaint into 476 separate actions, this  [***3]  being one of them, based on the allegedly infringing work and ordered that amended complaints be filed. 3

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

410 F.3d 792 *; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 10140 **; 2005 FED App. 0243P (6th Cir.) ***; 74 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1865 ****; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P29,017

No. 02-6521 BRIDGEPORT MUSIC, INC.; WESTBOUND RECORDS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, SOUTHFIELD MUSIC, INC.; NINE RECORDS, INC., Plaintiffs, v. DIMENSION FILMS; MIRAMAX FILM CORP., Defendants, NO LIMIT FILMS LLC, Defendant-Appellee. No. 03-5738 BRIDGEPORT MUSIC, INC.; SOUTHFIELD MUSIC, INC.; NINE RECORDS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, WESTBOUND RECORDS, INC., Plaintiff, v. DIMENSION FILMS, et al., Defendants, NO LIMIT FILMS LLC, Defendant-Appellee.

Prior History:  [**1]  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville. No. 01-00412--Thomas A. Higgins, District Judge.

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 401 F.3d 647, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 28641 (6th Cir. Tenn., 2004)

CORE TERMS

sound recording, district court, Records, sampling, Films, Music, copies, infringement, license, digital, summary judgment, attorney's fees, sounds, plaintiffs', prevailing, discovery, exclusive right, amend, song, de minimis, artists, copyrighted work, similarity, duplicate, deadline, chord, costs, musical composition, soundtrack, creativity

Copyright Law, Scope of Copyright Protection, Ownership Interests, General Overview, Subject Matter, Protected Subject Matter, Musical Works, Musical Arrangements, Statutory Copyright & Fixation, Sound Recordings After 1972, Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, Appropriateness, Judgments, Appeals, Summary Judgment Review, Standards of Review, Motions for Summary Judgment, Genuine Disputes, Materiality of Facts, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Copyright Infringement Actions, Civil Infringement Actions, Rehearings in Appellate Courts, Elements, Copying by Defendants, Ownership Rights, Adaptations, Limitations, Business & Corporate Compliance, Infringement, Collective & Derivative Works, Derivative Works, Preparation of Derivative Works, Abuse of Discretion, Pleadings, Amendment of Pleadings, Leave of Court, Damages, Types of Damages, Costs & Attorney Fees, Costs & Attorney Fees, Attorney Fees & Expenses, Basis of Recovery, Statutory Awards, Clearly Erroneous Review