cyckV4

Recommendations

Info

“De minimis” Copying 419 Newton’s claim for infringement into the class of cases that allege what Nimmer [the prominent copyright treatise] refers to as “fragmented literal similarity.” Fragmented literal similarity exists where the defendant copies a portion of the plaintiff’s work exactly or nearly exactly, without appropriating the work’s overall essence or structure. Because Images from Aoki, Boyle, and Jenkins, Theft! A History of Music (forthcoming).
420 COPYRIGHT’S “REACH”: INFRINGEMENT the degree of similarity is high in such cases, the dispositive question is whether the similarity goes to trivial or substantial elements. The substantiality of the similarity is measured by considering the qualitative and quantitative significance of the copied portion in relation to the plaintiff’s work as a whole. This focus on the sample’s relation to the plaintiff’s work as a whole embodies the fundamental question in any infringement action, as expressed more than 150 years ago by Justice Story: whether “so much is taken[] that the value of the original is sensibly diminished, or the labors of the original author are substantially to an injurious extent appropriated by another.” Courts also focus on the relationship to the plaintiff’s work because a contrary rule that measured the significance of the copied segment in the defendant’s work would allow an unscrupulous defendant to copy large or qualitatively significant portions of another’s work and escape liability by burying them beneath non-infringing material in the defendant’s own work, even where the average audience might recognize the appropriation. Thus, as the district court properly concluded, the fact that Beastie Boys “looped” the sample throughout “Pass the Mic” is irrelevant in weighing the sample’s qualitative and quantitative significance. When viewed in relation to Newton’s composition as a whole, the sampled portion is neither quantitatively nor qualitatively significant. Quantitatively, the three-note sequence appears only once in Newton’s composition. It is difficult to measure the precise relationship between this segment and the composition as a whole, because the score calls for between 180 and 270 seconds of improvisation. When played, however, the segment lasts six seconds and is roughly two percent of the four-and-a-half-minute “Choir” sound recording licensed by Beastie Boys. Qualitatively, this section of the composition is no more significant than any other section. Indeed, with the exception of two notes, the entirety of the scored portions of “Choir” consist of notes separated by whole and half-steps from their neighbors; the remainder of the composition calls for sections of improvisation that range between 90 and 180 seconds in length. Although the sampled section may be representative of the scored portions of the composition, Newton has failed to offer any evidence as to this section’s particular significance in the composition as a whole. Conclusion . . . We hold today that Beastie Boys’ use of a brief segment of that composition, consisting of three notes separated by a half-step over a background C note, is not sufficient to sustain a claim for copyright infringement. We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the ground that Beastie Boys’ use of the composition was de minimis and therefore not actionable. GRABER, Circuit Judge, dissenting. . . . [O]n the record before us, a jury reasonably could find that Beastie Boys’ use of the sampled material was not de minimis. Therefore, summary judgment is inappropriate. . . . Even passages with relatively few notes may be qualitatively significant. The opening melody of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony is relatively simple and features only four notes, but it certainly is compositionally distinctive and recognizable. . . . Because Newton has presented evidence establishing that reasonable ears differ over the qualitative significance of the composition of the sampled material, summary judgment is inappropriate in this case. Newton should be allowed to present his claims of infringement to a jury. I therefore dissent from the majority’s conclusion to the contrary. • • • • • • • • • •
Page 2 and 3:
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LAW & THE IN
Page 4 and 5:
Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ....
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii 5.) 1052(e) .
Page 8 and 9:
TABLE OF CONTENTS v d.) A Two-Part
Page 10 and 11:
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii In re Fisher,
Page 12 and 13:
x INTRODUCTION Basic Themes: Three
Page 14 and 15:
xii INTRODUCTION see the Lotus v. B
Page 16 and 17:
CHAPTER ONE The Theories Behind Int
Page 18 and 19:
The Theories Behind Intellectual Pr
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
CHAPTER TWO Intellectual Property &
Page 56 and 57:
Limitations on Congressional Power:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
CHAPTER THREE Intellectual Property
Page 102 and 103:
Intellectual Property & the First A
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
108 TRADEMARK: INTRODUCTION right?
Page 124 and 125:
110 TRADEMARK: INTRODUCTION Compari
Page 126 and 127:
112 TRADEMARK: INTRODUCTION the hol
Page 128 and 129:
114 TRADEMARK: INTRODUCTION out of
Page 130 and 131:
116 TRADEMARK: INTRODUCTION PROBLEM
Page 132 and 133:
118 SUBJECT MATTER: REQUIREMENTS FO
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
154 GROUNDS FOR REFUSING REGISTRATI
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
CHAPTER SEVEN Trademark Infringemen
Page 192 and 193:
Use in Commerce 179 it purchase not
Page 194 and 195:
Use in Commerce 181 associated with
Page 196 and 197:
Use in Commerce 183 engaged in the
Page 198 and 199:
Use in Commerce 185 A. Trademark In
Page 200 and 201:
Likelihood of Confusion 187 Doughne
Page 202 and 203:
Likelihood of Confusion 189 closely
Page 204 and 205:
Likelihood of Confusion 191 appella
Page 206 and 207:
Likelihood of Confusion 193 sophist
Page 208 and 209:
Contributory Infringement 195 meani
Page 210 and 211:
Contributory Infringement 197 Backg
Page 212 and 213:
Contributory Infringement 199 Claim
Page 214 and 215:
Contributory Infringement 201 on th
Page 216 and 217:
Contributory Infringement 203 B. Di
Page 218 and 219:
Contributory Infringement 205 for w
Page 220 and 221:
Contributory Infringement 207 an un
Page 222 and 223:
Contributory Infringement 209 You h
Page 224 and 225:
Contributory Infringement 211 Googl
Page 226 and 227:
214 DEFENSES TO TRADEMARK INFRINGEM
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
232 FALSE ADVERTISING, DILUTION &
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
272 INTRODUCTION TO COPYRIGHT: THEO
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
What does copyright cover? CHAPTER
Page 310 and 311:
What does copyright cover? 299 Imag
Page 312 and 313:
Originality: Independent Creation a
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
The Idea-Expression Distinction 319
Page 332 and 333:
The Idea-Expression Distinction 321
Page 334 and 335:
Merger of Idea and Expression 323 3
Page 336 and 337:
Merger of Idea and Expression 325 W
Page 338 and 339:
Merger of Idea and Expression 327 b
Page 340 and 341:
Merger of Idea and Expression 329 a
Page 342 and 343:
Merger of Idea and Expression 331 t
Page 344 and 345:
Merger of Idea and Expression 333 j
Page 346 and 347:
Merger of Idea and Expression 335 A
Page 348 and 349:
Useful Articles 337 PROBLEM 11-2 [W
Page 350 and 351:
Useful Articles 339 if design eleme
Page 352 and 353:
Useful Articles 341 form, the six-i
Page 354 and 355:
Methods of Operation: Introduction
Page 356 and 357:
Page 358 and 359:
Page 360 and 361:
Page 362 and 363:
Page 364 and 365:
Page 366 and 367:
Page 368 and 369:
Page 370 and 371:
Page 372 and 373:
Page 374 and 375:
Fixation (Copyright Meets Software,
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Page 380 and 381: Fixation (Copyright Meets Software,
Page 392 and 393: CHAPTER TWELVE Copyright’s “Rea
Page 394 and 395: Exclusive Rights 383 Shakespeare’
Page 396 and 397: The Idea/Expression Distinction in
Page 398 and 399: The Idea/Expression Distinction in
Page 400 and 401: Copyright Meets Computer Software:
Page 418 and 419: Copyright in Characters 407 c.) Cop
Page 420 and 421: Copyright in Characters 409 charact
Page 422 and 423: A Two-Part Test for Copyright Infri
Page 428 and 429: “De minimis” Copying 417 puppy
Page 432 and 433: “De minimis” Copying 421 Notes
Page 434 and 435: CHAPTER THIRTEEN Limitations on Exc
Page 436 and 437: Fair Use, Technology and Contributo
Page 452 and 453: Unpublished works, “Scoops” and
Page 460 and 461: Transformative Use, Parody, Comment
Page 476 and 477: Fair Use Meets Technology 465 4.) F
Page 478 and 479: Fair Use Meets Technology 467 succe
Page 480 and 481:
Fair Use Meets Technology 469 rebut
Page 482 and 483:
Fair Use Meets Technology 471 Compu
Page 484 and 485:
Fair Use Meets Technology 473 Becau
Page 486 and 487:
Fair Use Meets Technology 475 she w
Page 488 and 489:
Fair Use Meets Technology 477 owner
Page 490 and 491:
Fair Use Meets Technology 479 corre
Page 492 and 493:
Fair Use Meets Technology 481 or li
Page 494 and 495:
Fair Use Meets Technology 483 reaso
Page 496 and 497:
Fair Use Meets Technology 485 onlin
Page 498 and 499:
A Fair Use Case-Study: Multiple Cop
Page 500 and 501:
Page 502 and 503:
Page 504 and 505:
Page 506 and 507:
Page 508 and 509:
Page 510 and 511:
Page 512 and 513:
Page 514 and 515:
Page 516 and 517:
Page 518 and 519:
Page 520 and 521:
Page 522 and 523:
Page 524 and 525:
Conclusion 513 annually from Eastla
Page 526 and 527:
CHAPTER FOURTEEN Secondary Liabilit
Page 528 and 529:
The Stakes of Contributory Infringe
Page 530 and 531:
Contributory and Vicarious Infringe
Page 532 and 533:
Page 534 and 535:
Page 536 and 537:
Page 538 and 539:
Inducement Liability 527 power and
Page 540 and 541:
Inducement Liability 529 As the num
Page 542 and 543:
Inducement Liability 531 contributo
Page 544 and 545:
Inducement Liability 533 promoting
Page 546 and 547:
Inducement Liability 535 capability
Page 548 and 549:
Inducement Liability 537 films (e.g
Page 550 and 551:
Inducement Liability 539 114 Yale L
Page 552 and 553:
Safe Harbors: Section 512, Direct I
Page 554 and 555:
Page 556 and 557:
Page 558 and 559:
Page 560 and 561:
Page 562 and 563:
Page 564 and 565:
Page 566 and 567:
Page 568 and 569:
558 ANTI-CIRCUMVENTION: A NEW STATU
Page 570 and 571:
Page 572 and 573:
Page 574 and 575:
Page 576 and 577:
Page 578 and 579:
Page 580 and 581:
Page 582 and 583:
Page 584 and 585:
Page 586 and 587:
Page 588 and 589:
Page 590 and 591:
Page 592 and 593:
Page 594 and 595:
Page 596 and 597:
Page 598 and 599:
Page 600 and 601:
Page 602 and 603:
Page 604 and 605:
Page 606 and 607:
Page 608 and 609:
Page 610 and 611:
Page 612 and 613:
CHAPTER SIXTEEN Copyright & State M
Page 614 and 615:
Introduction 605 (A) any cause of a
Page 616 and 617:
Introduction 607 viewer directly to
Page 618 and 619:
Subject Matter and General Scope: E
Page 620 and 621:
Page 622 and 623:
Page 624 and 625:
Page 626 and 627:
Preemption, Misappropriation & the
Page 628 and 629:
Page 630 and 631:
Page 632 and 633:
Page 634 and 635:
Page 636 and 637:
Page 638 and 639:
Page 640 and 641:
632 PATENTS: HOPES, FEARS, HISTORY
Page 642 and 643:
Page 644 and 645:
Page 646 and 647:
Page 648 and 649:
Page 650 and 651:
Page 652 and 653:
Page 654 and 655:
Page 656 and 657:
Page 658 and 659:
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN Patentable Subject
Page 660 and 661:
Laws of Nature and Natural Phenomen
Page 662 and 663:
Page 664 and 665:
Page 666 and 667:
Page 668 and 669:
Page 670 and 671:
Page 672 and 673:
Page 674 and 675:
Abstract Ideas, Business Methods an
Page 676 and 677:
Page 678 and 679:
Page 680 and 681:
Page 682 and 683:
Page 684 and 685:
Page 686 and 687:
Page 688 and 689:
Page 690 and 691:
Page 692 and 693:
Page 694 and 695:
Page 696 and 697:
Page 698 and 699:
Page 700 and 701:
Page 702 and 703:
Page 704 and 705:
698 REQUIREMENTS FOR PATENT PROTECT
Page 706 and 707:
Page 708 and 709:
Page 710 and 711:
Page 712 and 713:
Page 714 and 715:
Page 716 and 717:
Page 718 and 719:
Page 720 and 721:
Page 722 and 723:
Page 724 and 725:
CHAPTER TWENTY Requirements for Pat
Page 726 and 727:
Novelty: Basics 721 recapitulate al
Page 728 and 729:
Novelty: Basics 723 was no evidence
Page 730 and 731:
Novelty: Anticipation of Every Elem
Page 732 and 733:
Page 734 and 735:
Page 736 and 737:
Novelty: Inherency 731 of invalidit
Page 738 and 739:
Novelty: Inherency 733 rationale be
Page 740 and 741:
Statutory Bar: Public Use 735 for a
Page 742 and 743:
Statutory Bar: Public Use 737 adopt
Page 744 and 745:
Statutory Bar: The Experimental Use
Page 746 and 747:
Page 748 and 749:
Page 750 and 751:
746 NON-OBVIOUSNESS Graham v. John
Page 752 and 753:
748 NON-OBVIOUSNESS Jefferson’s p
Page 754 and 755:
750 NON-OBVIOUSNESS be patentable i
Page 756 and 757:
752 NON-OBVIOUSNESS authorize the i
Page 758 and 759:
754 NON-OBVIOUSNESS B. The Inventio
Page 760 and 761:
756 NON-OBVIOUSNESS most be periphe
Page 762 and 763:
758 NON-OBVIOUSNESS of the tubing,
Page 764 and 765:
760 NON-OBVIOUSNESS toward nonobvio
Page 766 and 767:
762 NON-OBVIOUSNESS contaminating s
Page 768 and 769:
764 NON-OBVIOUSNESS solve the probl
Page 770 and 771:
766 NON-OBVIOUSNESS now claims. 3 T
Page 772 and 773:
768 NON-OBVIOUSNESS A. Who Is Presu
Page 774 and 775:
770 NON-OBVIOUSNESS PROBLEM 21-1 a.
Page 776 and 777:
CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO A Creative Commo
Page 778 and 779:
A Creative Commons? Summary and Con
Page 780 and 781:
James Boyle, A Creative Commons 777
Page 782 and 783:
Page 784 and 785:
Page 786 and 787:
show all

cyckV4

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?