• About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer
  • Oregon IP Resources

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Oregon Intellectual Property Blog

Tag Archives: Vicarious Copyright Infringement

Umpqua Bank sued over unauthorized sale of IP Catalog

28 Monday Aug 2017

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Contributory Copyright Infringement, Contributory Trademark Infringement, Conversion, Direct Copyright Infringement, Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Trademark Infringement

The Complaint (below) in this intellectual lawsuit has complicated facts that you’ll want to read for yourself. The lawsuit was originally filed in Delaware in February 2017 but recently transferred to the District of Oregon.

Digital Funding, LLC v. Umpqua Bank

Court Case Number: 3:17-cv-01321-PK
File Date: Friday, August 25, 2017
Plaintiff: Digital Funding, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Richard M. Beck, Sally E. Veghte of Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP
Defendant: Umpqua Bank
Cause: Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations, Conversion, Direct Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Contributory Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Trademark Infringement, Contributory Trademark Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Paul Papak

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Sewing patterns lead to copyright lawsuit; functionality doctrine invoked?

06 Wednesday Jul 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Contributory Copyright Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Litigation Update, Michael J. McShane, Vicarious Copyright Infringement

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:

View this document on Scribd

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

17 Sunday Jan 2016

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Accounting, Breach of Contract, Contractual Indemnity, Contributory Copyright Infringement, Declaratory Relief, Litigation Update, Vicarious Copyright Infringement

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:

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Jacobus Rentmeester v. Nike

25 Sunday Jan 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Contributory Copyright Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Litigation Update, Michael W. Mosman, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act

In this lawsuit, sure to get media coverage, Plaintiff, a photographer, claims Nike’s Jordan Brand ripped off his iconic image of Michael Jordan.

Check out this article for a full breakdown.

Stay tuned for legal updated.

Jacobus Rentmeester v. Nike, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00113
File Date: Thursday, January 22, 2015
Plaintiff: Jacobus Rentmeester
Plaintiff Counsel: Cody B. Hoesly of Larkins Vacura LLP
Defendant: Nike, Inc.
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Contributory Copyright Infringement, Violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael W. Mosman

View this document on Scribd

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Fraserside IP v. William Michael Jones et al.

21 Saturday Apr 2012

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Contributory Copyright Infringement, Copyright Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Inducement of Copyright Infringement, John V. Acosta, Vicarious Copyright Infringement

Fraserside IP LLC v. William Michael Jones et al

Court Case Number:    3:12-cv-00699-AC
File Date:    Friday, April 20, 2012
Plaintiff:     Fraserside IP LLC
Plaintiff Counsel:     Lake J.H. Perriguey of Law Works LLC
Defendant:     William Michael Jones, Mindy Jones, http://www.boneprone.com, http://www.tubekings.com, http://www.socalmovies.com, La Vista, Chin Holdings China, Marvin Greencarrier, John Does 1 – 100, John Doe Companies 1-100
Cause:    Copyright Infringement, Contributory Copyright Infringement, Vicarious Copyright Infringement, Inducement of Copyright Infringement, False Designation of Origin
Court:    Oregon District Court
Judge:     Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta

View this document on Scribd

Related story: Private Sues BoneProne, ‘Porn Mafia Family’ for Infringement

Categories

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Join 147 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Oregon Intellectual Property Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...