Remove 2000 Remove Copyright Infringement Remove Due Diligence Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Fixes One Problem with the Copyright Statute of Limitations, But Punts Another — Warner Chappell Music v. Nealy (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

If the Supreme Court upholds the discovery rule for copyright cases, or simply declines to address it, the decision will leave copyright defendants exposed to very large awards for years of infringing conduct (as they have been everywhere but the Second Circuit). 549, 555 (2000). Petrella , 572 U.S. Wood , 528 U.S.

Music 95
article thumbnail

Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy: Supreme Court Allows Retrospective Copyright Damages Beyond 3 Years Based on Discovery Rule

IP Intelligence

In 2018, after Nealy finished serving his second prison sentence, he sued Warner and others in the Southern District of Florida for copyright infringement, claiming he held copyrights to Music Specialist’s songs and that Warner’s licensing activities infringed his rights. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.

Music 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Legal Implications of IPR Protection ‘In The Cloud’: an Indian Analysis

IIPRD

Copyright laws, for instance, vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. What constitutes copyright infringement in one country may not be in another. 1] , t he cloud service provider was not made liable even after abetting the infringement. “The 21, Acts of Parliament, 2000 (India). [1] Thus, in Tiffany(NJ) Inc.

article thumbnail

The Ninth Circuit Reaffirms the Discovery Rule for the Copyright Act’s Statute of Limitations — Starz v. MGM (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

In so holding, the Ninth Circuit created (or widened) a circuit split with the Second Circuit, which previously held that even under the discovery rule, damages for copyright infringement are limited to “a three-year lookback period from the time a suit is filed.” Scholastic, Inc. , 3d 39, 52 (2d Cir. Petrella , 572 U.S. 3d 39 (2d Cir.