Collecting Royalties Indicative of Authorship, not Work for Hire

authorship circuit watch copyright work for hire

On August 21, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in an interesting example of what is deemed “work for hire,” as defined by the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §201(b), in Morricone Music Inc. v. Bixio Music Group Ltd..[1] Ennio Morricone is the late Italian composer of several musical film scores, which …

Continue Reading

Government Shutdown Effect on IP Offices

copyright patent trademark

At midnight on Friday, December 21, 2018, the U.S. government entered a partial shutdown, which means all non-essential federal departments will close operations until funding has been appropriated by Congress.  This includes national parks, NASA, and federal agencies.  Those exempt include airports and the U.S. Postal Service, which will continue normal service through Christmas Eve, …

Continue Reading

SCOTUS Watch: Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Copyright Cost Row

copyright fees scotus watch

On September 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc.,[1] in order to resolve a split in the circuits related to prevailing copyright litigant’s awarding of “full costs,” and whether that means only taxable costs under 28 U.S.C. §1920 – court and witness fees, copying costs, expert …

Continue Reading

Software Removing Metadata Not Enough Showing to “Conceal or Induce” Copyright Infringement

copyright DMCA technology

Technology is meant to make things easier or improve conditions in society.  However, sometimes technology, in the form of software, can sometimes do errant things that can create issues later.  So is the case with Stevens v. CoreLogic, Inc.,[1] decided by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on June 20, 2018.  The Ninth …

Continue Reading

Second Circuit Will Not Yet Hear Embedded Tweet Appeal

copyright Fair Use technology

In a somewhat unsurprising move, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied an interlocutory appeal (28 U.S.C. §1292) requested by publisher defendants in Heavy, Inc. v. Goldman.[1]  The order can be found here 18-910_goldman-CA2_intapp_dend.  As discussed in an earlier posting on this blog, the district court case, Goldman v. Breitbart News Network, LLC, held …

Continue Reading