Category Archives: Copyright

Rogue sues Photographer/Videographer for Copyright Infringement

14 Monday Nov 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Plaintiff Oregon Brewing Company (a.k.a. Rogue) is suing its past photographer/videographer, asserting 39 separate instances of copyright infringement. The Defendant allegedly used photographs and short films he had created (but which were owned by Rogue pursuant to an Employment Agreement, see Exhibit 1) on his personal website. Additionally, Defendant submitted the 39 works for registration with the Registrar of Copyrights.

Oregon Brewing Company v. Blair

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-02130-HZ
File Date: Monday, November 7, 2016
Plaintiff: Oregon Brewing Company
Plaintiff Counsel: Andrew D. Glascock of Hiefield Foster & Glascock, LLP
Defendant: Benjamin R. Blair
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Marco A. Hernandez

Complaint:

Exhibit 1:

Country Archer vs. Tillamook Country Smoker…are you confused?

21 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trade Dress, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Food fight!

Country Archer is a California-based purveyor of beef jerky.

Tillamook Country Smoker, based in Tillamook, Oregon, is one of the four largest purveyors of jerky in the United States.

On July 12, Tillamook Country Smoker received a demand letter from Country Archer accusing Tillamook’s new packaging of trademark infringement, copyright infringement, trade dress infringement and violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law.

Based on their belief that the demand letter was frivolous, Tillamook promptly filed this lawsuit seeking a declaration of non-infringement.

Take a look at the comparison images from the Complaint. Are you confused?

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 6.37.39 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 6.37.55 AM

Tillamook Country Smoker, Inc. v. S & E Gourmet Cuts, Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-01477-BR
File Date: Wednesday, July 20, 2016
Plaintiff: Tillamook Country Smoker, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: J. Peter Staples, Susan D. Pitchford, Amelia S. Forsberg of Chernoff Vilhauer LLP
Defendant: S & E Gourmet Cuts, Inc. d/b/a Country Archer, Country Archer
Cause: Declaration of Non-Infringement of Trademarks, Declaration of Non-Infringement of Trade Dress, Declaration of Non-Infringement of Copyright, Declaration of Non-Infringement of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §17200
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Anna J. Brown

Complaint: 

 

Sewing patterns lead to copyright lawsuit; functionality doctrine invoked?

06 Wednesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

This copyright lawsuit arises from the alleged infringement of sewing patterns. The Plaintiff, based in Eugene, Oregon, has sold sewing patterns since 1982. The Defendants, based in Georgia, are an online competitor allegedly selling unauthorized copies of the Plaintiff’s patterns.

Note that clothing design is usually held to be functional, and thus does not qualify for copyright protection. However, this lawsuit involves the patterns (drawings) themselves, not the clothing design shown therein.

Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design of the article that is portrayed. – Copyright.gov

I think there can still be an argument made that the sewing patterns do not qualify for protection under 102(b), that they are an illustrated procedure or process for making a dress.

17 U.S. Code § 102 (b)

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

Judge for yourself in the Complaint (below) but many of the drawings have little ornamental design elements beyond the utilitarian, and thus unprotectable, functionality required to accurately and adequately show someone how to make the dress.

Screen Shot 2016-07-06 at 9.35.57 AM

Stay tuned for updates.

Screen Shot 2016-07-06 at 9.08.48 AM

Ranita Corporation v. Beamer et al

Court Case Number: 6:16-cv-01368-MC
File Date: Tuesday, July 5, 2016
Plaintiff: Ranita Corporation d/b/a Sure-Fit Designs
Plaintiff Counsel: Jacob S. Gill of Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter P.C.
Defendant: Oticca Beamer, Fit & Fashion LLC, Beamer & Associates d/b/a Fit & Fashion
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Contributory Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael J. McShane

Complaint:

Bio-energy facility accused of stealing and modifying software written in “German-lish” relic code

01 Friday Jul 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The Plaintiff is an Austrian bank enforcing the claims of an insolvent Austrian company, Entec, that designed and built a bio-energy facility in Junction City, Oregon. Successful operation of the facility relied on some proprietary software, which in turn required a paid license. This dispute arises out of, among other things, the facility’s failure to pay the license fee. There is also an allegation that the software was illegally accessed and modified, perhaps to make the software operate with payment or to make it more functional.

The Defendants, the facility and a consultant firm, are accused of failure to pay for the installation of a software program, making unauthorized modifications to the software program, and ongoing use of the software program without a paid license.

The software code is described in the Exhibits as “written in German-lish [sic] and in a manner to intentionally create dependency and with a multitude of relic code.”

Screen Shot 2016-07-01 at 8.38.36 AM

Sparkasse Bregenz Bank, AG v. JC-Biomethane, LLC et al

Court Case Number: 6:16-cv-01199-AA
File Date: Thursday, June 23, 2016
Plaintiff: Sparkasse Bregenz Bank, AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Darien S. Loiselle, Stephanie Holberg of Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, P.C.
Defendant: JC-Biomethane, LLC; Essential Consulting Oregon LLC; Dean Foor
Cause: Copyright Infringement of the Software Program and Design Documents, Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, Conversion, Breach of Contract, Quantum Meruit, Breach of Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Ann L. Aiken

Complaint:

Exhibits:

 

Religious Publishing Company sued for Unauthorized Publication of Hymns

18 Monday Apr 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

This copyright action involving religious hymns arises from an alleged breach of a prior license agreement.

Screen Shot 2016-04-18 at 7.03.38 AM

Oregon Catholic Press v. Ambrosetti et al

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00651
File Date: Friday, April 15, 2016
Plaintiff: Oregon Catholic Press
Plaintiff Counsel: Leonard D. DuBoff of The DuBoff Law Group
Defendant: Ambrosetti et al
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Judge: Marco A. Hernandez

Complaint:

Oregon Department of Corrections sues over YouTube prison video

26 Friday Feb 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Social Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The State of Oregon, via the Department of Corrections, claims to be the exclusive owner of all intellectual property rights in a video entitled “Prison Cell Extraction,” showing the techniques to remove a prisoner from a cell. Defendant somehow obtained the video and posted it on YouTube.

Upon learning of the posting, the State of Oregon initiated a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) takedown request with YouTube to remove the video, and the video was initially removed by YouTube.

Screen Shot 2016-02-26 at 10.47.45 AMDefendant then filed a DMCA counter notification with YouTube, swearing under penalty of perjury that the video was removed by YouTube due to a mistake or misidentification on the basis that “its my video of me”.

YouTube informed the State of Oregon of the counter notification with instructions that if the State of Oregon did not “file an action seeking a court order to restrain the counter notifier’s allegedly infringing activity” the video could be reinstated on YouTube.

Hence, this lawsuit. Stay tuned for updates.

State of Oregon v. Ames

Court Case Number: 6:2016-cv-00345
File Date: Thursday, February 25, 2016
Plaintiff: State of Oregon
Plaintiff Counsel:Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General
Defendant: Ames
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Thomas M. Coffin

Complaint:

Chinese Scientist Accused of Misappropriating Cow Feed Technology

17 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

OmniGen Research, LLC et al v. Wang et al

Court Case Number: 6:2016-cv-00268
File Date: Monday, February 15, 2016
Plaintiff: Omnigen Research, LLC, Prince Agri Products, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Klaus H. Hamm, Scott E. Davis of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP
Defendant: YongQiang Wang, Yan Zheng, Bioshen
Cause: Breach of Contract, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations, Trade Secret Misappropriation, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael J. McShane

Complaint:

Divergence: Online developer files lawsuit over fraudulent DMCA takedown

11 Thursday Feb 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Here’s a case of first impression in Oregon. Plaintiff, developer of the popular online game Divergence: Online, has brought an action against a disgruntled designer for a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 512(f). In other words, Plaintiff claims that Defendant filed a fraudulent DMCA takedown notice. The allegedly false takedown notice had resulted in Plaintiff’s game being removed from Steam (a game distribution platform) for several days, costing Plaintiff “potentially thousands of dollars in sales.”

As general information, a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) Takedown is a procedure by which copyright owners can have infringing content removed from a website by providing notice to the internet service provider/hosting company. 512(f) was included in the DMCA to prevent fraudulent takedown reports, but it has rarely been enforced until recently. Copyright owners making a false DMCA notice are responsible for “any damages” incurred as a result of their action.

The Steam takedown (and eventual return) made gaming news and this lawsuit will likely do the same, as fraudulent DMCA takedowns have become a recurring problem in the online realm. Last year saw the first-ever award of damages for a fraudulent DMCA takedown under 512(f).

Stay tuned for updates.

512(f)

Stained Glass Llama, Corp. v. Bonner

Court Case Number: 3:16-cv-00253-MO
File Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Plaintiff: Stained Glass Llama, Corp.
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell, Drew P. Taylor of Crowell Law
Defendant: Robert William Bonner
Cause: Violation of 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) (False DMCA Notice)
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Michael W. Mosman

Complaint:

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Evox Productions v. Chrome Data Solutions

17 Sunday Jan 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Evox Productions, LLC v. Chrome Data Solutions, LP et al

Court Case Number: 3:2016-cv-00057 3
File Date: Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Plaintiff: Evox Productions LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Anna Sortun of Tonkon Torp LLP
Defendant: Chrome Data Solutions, LP, Chrome Systems Inc., Does 1-10
Cause: Contributory Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Breach of Contract, Contractual Indemnity, Accounting, Declaratory Relief
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Webb v. Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al

04 Monday Jan 2016

Posted by in Copyright, District of Oregon, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Oregon, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Webb v. Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al

Court Case Number: 3:2015-cv-02380
File Date: Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Plaintiff: Vincent L. Webb
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen J. Joncus of Joncus Law LLC
Defendant: Marlon Recreational Products USA, Ltd. et al
Cause: Violation of the Permanent Injunction, Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, Trademark Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Fraud
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Stacie F. Beckerman

Complaint: