Copyright Office Announces Electronic Registration

     Last September, the Copyright Office issued an announcement that it had begun beta testing of its web-based registration system, which was part of a new "electronic Copyright Office" (eCO) program (see Copyright Office Announces Electronic Registration Testing). Beginning July 1, 2008, the Copyright Office will offer its online registration system to the public.  Instruction for making claims to copyrighted works may be found here.

     According to a recent Copyright Office announcement, online registration through the eCO is the preferred way to register basic claims for literary works; visual arts works; performing arts works, including motion pictures; sound recordings; and single serials. Advantages of online filing include a lower filing fee; the fastest processing time; online status tracking of your claim; secure payment by credit or debit card, electronic check, or Copyright Office deposit account; and the ability to upload certain categories of deposits directly into eCO as electronic files.

     To register a claim electronically, go to the Copyright Office website at www.copyright.gov and click on the eCO logo shown above.

Maryland IP Litigation 2008: Lawsuit Summaries

     Below are summaries of recent IP-related lawsuits filed in the the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in 2008 (source: Justia).

  • Emerson Electric Co. v. John Does 1-10, No. 1:2008cv00734; filed March 20, 2008; assigned to J. Blake

     Plaintiff Emerson Electric, a Missouri company, states "This is a Complaint for an injunction, damages, and other appropriate relief to prevent unknown Defendants from engaging in a widespread fraudulent internet scheme that involves the infringement and misappropriation of Plaintiff’s trademarks. In this scheme, Defendants have impersonated Emerson and its chairman David N. Farr in emails and on internet job boards to trick unsuspecting internet users into believing they have obtained jobs with Emerson. In their supposed capacity as Emerson employees, these victims have – on instruction from Defendants – unwittingly cashed fraudulent United States Postal Service money orders or certified checks on behalf of Defendants. Defendants’ scam has caused Emerson irreparable harm, damaged its reputation, damaged its [EMERSON] mark, caused confusion in the marketplace as to the origin of the job offers and Emerson’s role in the scam, and caused Emerson to incur significant expenses and utilize significant resources in an effort to halt the scammers and stop the fraud."

     Plaintiff alleges trademark infringement under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1114), false designation of origin under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)), unfair competition/false advertising under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)), Maryland common law unfair competition against all defendants.

  • VTran Media Technologies, LLC v. Antietam Cable Television, Inc., No. 1:2008cv00739; filed March 21, 2008; assigned to J. Garbis

 

  • Almo Music Corporation et al v. Three Pols, LLC, No. 1:2008cv00747; filed March 25, 2008; assigned to J. Motz 

     This copyright infringement case was filed by plaintiffs Almo Music Corporation, Mighty Underdog Music, Sony/ATV Tunes LLC, Odnil Music Limited, Fifty-Six Hope Road Music Limited, Get Jet Music, Inc., Cherry Lane Music Publishing Co., Inc. and Dimensional Music of 1091 against defendants Three Pols, LLC, Joshua E. Gursky and Grant R. Gursky.  

  • Broadcast Music, Inc. et al v. Carullo Steele, Inc., No. 1:2008cv00824; filed April 2, 2008; assigned to J. Bennett

     This copyright infringement case was brought by plaintiff Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI), the licensee of copyrighted works owned by co-plaintiffs EMI Blackwood Music, Inc., House of Cash, Inc., Songs of Universal, Inc., EMI Virgin Songs, Inc., Elijah Blue Music, Unichappell Music, Inc., ABKCO Music, Inc., EMI Algree Music Corp., Wayne Hodge, Sony/ATV Songs, LLC, Leon E. Brooks, III and Ronnie Gene Dunn.

     Plaintiffs allege that defendants Carullo Steele, Inc., owner/operator of Freddies Bel Air (Bel Air, MD), and Stephen J. Carullo, Jr., an alleged officer of Carullo Steele, Inc., publicly performed copyrighted works owned/licensed by plaintiffs.

     Max Stadfeld of Offit Kurman, P.A. (Owings Mills, MD) filed the complaint on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Maryland IP Litigation 2008: Lawsuit Summaries Nos. 1-4

     Below are summaries of the first four IP-related lawsuits filed in the the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in 2008 (source: Justia). These lawsuits involve allegations of patent, copyright, and trademark infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, defamation, and a host of other state law claims. We begin with an interesting case involving Maryland's business trade/company name statute.

    This lawsuit pits two Maryland entities and their owners against each other. Plaintiff Nationwide Handyman, LLC alleges ownership of the federally-registered NATIONWIDE HANDYMAN trademark, the same being registered with the State of Maryland as a corporate name. Plaintiff contends that Defendant Nationwide Handyman & Remodeling, Inc., led by principal Joe Butts, violated Maryland Code Annotated § 1-504, which states the following (source: Michie's Legal Resources):

"An entity name must be distinguishable upon the records of the Department [of Assessments and Taxation] from:

(1) The entity name of an entity organized or authorized to transact business in the State;

(2) An entity name reserved or registered under this subtitle; and

(3) The disclosed assumed name adopted by a foreign entity authorized to transact business in this State."

     Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant violated Maryland Code Annotated § 13-301, which defines unfair or deceptive trade practices in Maryland as "false, falsely disparaging, or misleading oral or written statement, visual description, or other representation of any kind which has the capacity, tendency, or effect of deceiving or misleading consumers." Other allegations include violations of the Lanham Act. Plaintiff is seeking an injunction and monetary damages.

     This case highlights one advantage of registering a company name in Maryland: § 1-504 is available as a cause of action to those who register their business name. Thus, companies should register their business name in addition to registering their trademarks with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and the Maryland Secretary of State.

     Shawn Whittaker of The Law Offices of Shawn C. Whittaker PC filed the Complaint on behalf of the Plaintiff.

     Three more cases after the jump...

     This Declaratory Judgment action was initiated by W.L. Gore & Associates against Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corporation concerning Saint-Gobain's U.S. Patents 6,290,265 and 7,093,859 (a divisional of the '265). W.L. Gore is a Delaware company with a significant presence in Elkton, MD. Saint-Gobain is a California corporation with a principal place of business in Valley Forge, PA.., and it allegedly sells products in Maryland. The patents involve connectors and tubing assemblies for transporting health care fluids.

     The Complaint contains detailed allegations of inequitable conduct, as well as bare allegations of unfair competitionfalse and defamatory statements, and injurious falsehood under Maryland law.

     According to the Complaint, the defamation count is based on Defendant's alleged November 2007 press release, which W.L. Gore contends included a statement that Defendant owns exclusive rights to the devices claimed in the patents-at-suit, which W.L. Gore says was false and defamatory when written because Defendant asserted that it holds exclusive rights to manifolds covered by one or both of the patents-in-suit when Defendant knew its patents were invalid and unenforceable as a result of the inequitable conduct described above (I'm summarizing; read the Complaint to see the details). W.L. Gore claims the press release was issued with malice. Hinging a defamation count to an inequitable conduct count is rather unusual, I would say. It doesn't make a lot of sense that someone should be liable for defamation by publishing a statement that it owns exclusive rights to products covered by presumptively valid patents.

     Mark Koehn, Lawrence Gotts, and Brandon White of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker (Washington, DC), filed the lawsuit on behalf of W.L. Gore.

     This case involves Turin, Italy's Gruppo Essenziero  Italiano, which alleges to be the owner of the trademark AROMITALIA, and Maryland's Aromi D'Italia, Inc., the previous exclusive distributor of AROMITALIA gelato products in the U.S. The relationship between the parties deteriorated, according to the Complaint, after the Defendant failed to pay money owed the Plaintiff. Baltimore's Gordon, Feinblatt, Rothman, Hoffberger & Hollander, LLC, filed the Complaint.

     Reeves, a Montgomery County, MD resident, brought this copyright infringement, breach of contract, and misappropriation of trade secrets action against Delaware entities The Boeing Company (based in Seattle) and BAE Systems, Inc. (based in Rockville, MD). Mr. Reeves alleges unauthorized use, copying, disclosure and/or distribution of certain software developed by LEXICO Enterprises, Inc. for use in Boeing airline test systems (Reeves states that he acquired all rights to the software from LEXICO, for which he was its Vice President). BAE acquired Boeing's airline test business operations, which brought it into the case. Mark Freeman, of Freeman & Freeman PC, filed the Complaint for Mr. Reeves.

Copyright Litigation in Maryland: 2007 Trends

     In 2007, the major music recording companies, led by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), filed more copyright lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland than any other group or individual. RIAA accounted for 16 of the 30 copyright lawsuits filed last year (53%). In 2006, RIAA accounted for an estimated 22 of 54 copyright lawsuits (41%). All of the RIAA lawsuits involved individual defendants accused of illegally downloading or sharing copyrighted music. The 30 copyright lawsuits involved a total of 168 plaintiffs (64 unique entities/individuals). Of those 168 plaintiffs, 85 were RIAA members, including the following:

  • Sony BMG Music Entertainment (plaintiff in all 16 of the RIAA lawsuits);
  • UMG Recordings (plaintiff in 14 of the RIAA lawsuits)
  • Arista Records (plaintiff in 12 lawsuits)
  • BMG Music (12 lawsuits)
  • Virgin Records America (9)
  • Capitol Records (9)
  • Warner Brothers Records (8)
  • Interscope Records (8)

     Twelve U.S. District Court Judges presided over the 30 copyright lawsuits in 2007: Bennett (3), Blake (2), Chasanow (1), Cullinane (1), Davis (4), Dorr (1), Garbis (2), Legg (2), Messitte (6), Quarles (2), Titus (3), and Williams (3). All 6 of Judge Messitte's cases involved RIAA lawsuits (in 2006, Judge Messitte presided over an estimated 21 of the 22 RIAA lawsuits).

     On January 10, 2008, RIAA announced on its website that it had sent a new wave of 407 pre-litigation settlement letters to 18 universities nationwide as part of its "ongoing campaign against online music theft" (none of the targeted universities involve Maryland institutions, so perhaps 2008 will see fewer RIAA lawsuits in Maryland).

Notes:

  • Source: Justia.com and PACER