This week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, in a case captioned Forest Park Pictures v. Universal Television Network, Inc., united with the Ninth Circuit in California by holding that breach of implied contract claims based on “theft of ideas” are not preempted by the Copyright Act. In doing so, the decision

Our nation’s great capitol is home to many museums, national monuments, and of course the White House. In addition to all these symbols of American history is The Column. The Column, the centerpiece of the National Mall, is a collection of nineteen steel structures commemorating Korean War Veterans. Tourists gather around these statues with their

Kim Seng Co. v. J & A Importers, Inc., 810 F. Supp. 2d 1046 (C.D. Cal. 2011) In Kim Seng Co. v. J & A Importers, Inc., a California District Court considered the copyrightability of a food display. Kim Seng Co., (“Kim Seng”), a Chinese-Vietnam food supply company sued another Chinese-Vietnam food supplier, J &

South Park, the long running television show, is no-stranger to parodies, spoofing everything from High School Musical to The Passion of The Christ. But their humor was not appreciated by Brownmark Films, LLC, (“Brownmark”), who sued the comedy show for copyright infringement when it made fun of its dance video What What (In the Butt)

A filmmaker’s rights under the First Amendment to use well-known trademarks for artistic and expressive purposes will be protected against a challenge from the trademark holder so long as the use has genuine relevance to the film’s storyline. On June 15, 2012 the District Court for the Southern District of New York, on a motion

An artist’s right to incorporate trademarks in expressive works pits the artist’s fundamental right of freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment, against the desire of a trademark owner to aggressively control the licensing of merchandise based on its trademarks. And when the artwork involves a much-loved college sports team, the tension runs deep.

Google Cleared of Java Copyright Infringement: In First Ruling on Copyrightability of APIs, CA Court Finds That Functional Java API Code Is a “Method of Operation” Not Protected By Copyright Law

By Daniel J. Klein Google’s AdWords program is no stranger to legal controversy, having been the subject of several trademark infringement lawsuits in the past.

On April 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit handed down its decision in Rosetta Stone Ltd. v. Google Inc. At issue in the appeal was whether Google’s sale of “Rosetta Stone” keywords for use in Google’s AdWords advertisements constituted primary (direct) or secondary (contributory/vicarious) trademark infringement or diluted Rosetta Stone’s trademarks.

The recent case of Urbont v. Sony Music Entertainment, 11 Civ. 4516 (S.D.N.Y. March 27, 2012), highlights the disagreement among some federal courts as to when the three-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement claims begins its countdown. Directly at issue is whether the clock starts ticking when the infringement starts (the “injury rule”), or