Showing posts with label wilful infringement of copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wilful infringement of copyright. Show all posts

Tuesday, 3 May 2016

Universal and Capitol fly high with copyright win

Universal Music and Capitol Records have obtained summary judgment against IFP and parent company Global Eagle, an in flight music licensing company, and the two recoded music companies can now look forward to a jury deciding the quantum of damages to be awarded, with reports saying this "could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars."

IFP is a worldwide provider of in-flight entertainment from movies to songs and IFP provided American Airlines (and later US Airways) with music playlists obtained via physical CDs and digital downloads. In 2008 the company approached the major labels for a deal and what followed has been described as a "few years of painstaking negotiations over advances and revenue apportionment, complicated by some catalogs not being available for in-flight licensing as well as IFP not wishing to let the cat out of the bag about the lack of licenses."

Added to this was the fact that although IFP was based in Los Angeles, and had completed some of the early reproduction work there, the company said that duplication and encoding was taking place in the U.K. under a different licensing regime. Added to this was the position advanced by IFP that it had reached oral or implied license and that the record companies committed fraud and tortiously interfered with its contracts with American and United. 

In his summary judgment ruling, U.S. District Judge George Wu wrote: "At best, there is evidence that the parties discussed various terms, but never reached any final agreements" and further, "There is ample evidence that IFP knew it had no licenses from Plaintiffs and that it could be sued for copyright infringement, and no evidence that Plaintiffs ever indicated to IFP that any such licenses were forthcoming or misrepresented any existing fact."

Wu also found that IFP acted wilfully by collecting money from airlines for copyright licenses in anticipation that it would one day have to make amends. The judge wrote: "As Plaintiffs aptly state, '[i]f IFP’s infringements were not wilful, no infringements could ever be.'”

Judge Wu also had to decide on the issue of pre-1972 sound recordings not protected by federal copyright law, but now being interpreted under state law to protect against misappropriation. To this, IFP threw up an argument that such claims were pre empted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act, but that argument failed because in-flight entertainment is deemed as a "service" under the statute and that the connection with state law claims is substantial. 

The case is now set for a damages trial on May 10 with more than 4,500 copyrights involved. 

http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/universal-music-secures-summary.html

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/universal-wins-big-ruling-copyright-886886

Image: CuriMedia  https://www.flickr.com/people/14035760@N03

Saturday, 1 August 2009

Tenenbaum guilty and faces $675,000 damages, appeal and bankrupcy


A federal jury in Boston yesterday ordered Joel Tenenbaum, the Boston University postgraduate student who admitted illegally downloading and sharing music online, to pay $675,000 in damages to four record labels. The sum represents US $22,500 per track. Tenenbaum admitted in court that he had downloaded and distributed 30 songs and the only issue for the jury to decide was the quantum of damages to award the record labels. Under US federal law the recording companies were entitled to anything between $750 to $30,000 for each infringement and the law allows as much as $150,000 per track if the jury finds the infringements were wilful. On the witness stand Tenenbaum admitted downloading more than 800 songs from 1999 to 2007 on his home computer and his mother (a lawyer specialising in family law) made it clear in her evidence that she had warned him about his downloading. The Jury took just three hours to find Tenenbaum guilty of wilful infringement.
Tenenbaum seemed to take some comfort in the fact that the maximum jurors could have awarded in this case was $4.5 million saying “I'm disappointed, but I'm thankful it wasn't millions” adding "to me it sends a message of 'We considered your side with some legitimacy". The postgraduate physics student now says he will appeal and dependent on that appeal probably apply for bankruptcy. Tenenbaum was originally offered a settlement at approximately US $3,000 by the Recording Industry Association of America - which he countered by offering $500 saying he couldn’t afford to pay more - and then after some further negotiations Tenenbaum says he refused a settlement at $10,500 which he says was demanded by the RIAA - in hindsight a substantially cheaper option. But then hindsight is marvellous thing ...