Articles Posted in Copyright Litigation

Los Angeles, CA – Conan Properties International, LLC filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Prion Books Ltd., Carlton Publishing Group, and HarperCollins UK for the sale of “Conan the Barbarian” book. The fictional “Conan” character was created by the late Robert E. Howard, a prolific writer of fantasy stories published in the day’s popular “pulp fiction” magazines. Plaintiff now owns all of Howard’s copyrights in the “Conan” works.

Plaintiff alleges that in May of 2009, Defendants published a book entitled “Conan the Barbarian” in the United Kingdom, which book is now also available in the United States. Defendants’ book contains stories that allegedly infringe Plaintiff’s copyrights. Plaintiff also asserts causes of action for vicarious and contributory copyright infringement. The case is Conan Properties International, LLC v. Prion Books, Ltd. et al., CV09-08369 DDP (C.D. Cal. 2009).

Los Angeles, CA – Breakdown Services, Ltd. prepares script analyses and summaries, commonly known as “breakdowns,” to the entertainment community. The breakdowns are distributed via the Internet to authorized theatrical and other talent agencies and management companies. Plaintiff has applied for copyright registration of the material and alleges that all of the breakdowns prominently display the following warning: “This confidential information is the property of Breakdown Services, Ltd. – DO NOT COPY!!!”

Netxplosion is accused of copying Plaintiff’s breakdowns in their entirety and infringing Plaintiff’s copyrights by selling unauthorized copies of the breakdowns. Plaintiff allegedly demanded that Defendants cease infringing on Plaintiff’s works, but Defendants continued to willfully and knowingly copy Plaintiff’s breakdown. The case is Breakdown Services, Ltd. v. Netxplosion et al., CV09-8179 DSF (C.D. Cal. 2009).

Los Angeles, CA – Jewelry designer David Rasnick sued Jewelry and Minerals of Las Vegas for copyright infringement. Rasnick has been designing jewelry for over 20 years and designed a teardrop shaped humpback whale loop earring. Rasnick registered the work with the Copyright Office on May 22, 1989. Rasnick alleges that “Defendant has sold unauthorized and infringing copies of the humpback whale earring, which bear a design that is substantially similar to the humpback whale earring at retail, at wholesale and through retailers.” Rasnick alleges that his damages cannot yet be determined and he may elect between the profits generated by the defendant or statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504. Plaintiff also requests that the damages be enhanced because the Defendant’s alleged infringement is willful and intentional. Plaintiff also requests his attorneys’ fees and other costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505. The case is David Rasnick v. Jewelry and Minerals of Las Vegas, CV09-08072 MMM (C.D. Cal. 2009).

Los Angeles, CA – Jacoby Entertainment, Ltd. sued Netflix, Inc. and Tango Entertainment, Inc. over releas and distribution of “I Am Waiting No More” motion picture. Plaintiff is owned by Joseph Jacoby, a motion picture director-writer-producer. In 1971, he completed the screenplay for the motion picture “Hurry Up, Or I’ll be 30,” which was fortunately and correctly registered with the Copyright Office – and not the WGA. Cinematic production was completed soon thereafter and the movie was released in theatres in 1973.

Plaintiff alleges that Netflix has been renting unauthorized copies of the motion picture under the changed name of “I Am Waiting No More.” The copies distributed by Defendants are allegedly of poor quality because they are derived from a physically worn print of “Hurry Up, Or I’ll be 30.” Plaintiff contends that Defendants have also altered the picture’s opening main title and removed the copyright notice. Further, the DVD jacket has also been changed by substituting a picture of Danny DeVito in his 50’s in place of the original picture when he was in his 20’s. The case is Jacoby Entertainment, Ltd. v. Netflix, Inc. et al., CV09-7557 PA (C.D. Cal. 2009).

Los Angeles, CA – Cybersitter, LLC filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against CBS Interactive, Inc. accusing it of software piracy, “wherein two Chinese companies, backed by the Chinese government, stole approximately 3,000 lines of code from [Cybersitter’s] software program, and disseminated it to tens of millions of end users in China and elsewhere with the willing participation of Internet sites such as [CBS’s] ZDNet China. CBS participated in this Chinese government-led initiative to proliferate the pirated program amongst the Chinese-speaking population by offering the program for free download on its website.”

CYBERsitter’s software is an Internet content filter program “designed to help parents protect their children from viewing inappropriate pornographic and violent content on the Web,” and was one of the first programs of its kind when introduced over 14 years ago. Plaintiff alleges that the Chinese government and software developers copied its code in their infringing filtering program known as “Green Dam Youth Escort.” The complaint contends that “unlike Cybersitter, the Green Dam program was found to contain filters to block political and religious content expressing views that differed from those of the Chinese government. The program was also found to have serious security vulnerabilities that would allow third parties to monitor or take control of the computers on which it was installed.”

Plaintiff alleges infringement under U.S. copyright laws, in addition to copyright infringement under the copyright laws of the People’s Republic of China: “The [PRC] is a signatory to the Berne Convention and has adopted laws that comply with the minimum standards set by the Berne Convention. Accordingly, because Plaintiff’s Copyrighted Works are foreign works under the Chinese copyright law, those works are entitled to full protection of the Chinese copyright laws from the moment they are created without and need for registration in China (or elsewhere).” Plaintiff alleges that its estimated damages are no less than $1.2 Million. The case is CYBERsitter, LLC v. CBS Interactive, Inc., CV09-7245 AHM (C.D. Cal. 2009).

Los Angeles, CA – Screenwriter Yolanda Buggs sued Dreamworks and Paramount Pictures for copyright infringement over the release of the animated feature “Flushed Away.” Buggs was enrolled in the American Film Institute’s screenwriting program in 1999 when she met Chris Kuser, a fellow student who was also an intern at Dreamworks. During her time at AFI, Buggs developed an idea for an animated picture and wrote a screenplay, which she entitled “Critter Island,” about a roach that is flushed down the toilet in N.Y. and must navigate the sewers to get back to the high society home in which he lived. Buggs, like all screenwriters should, registered two versions of her screenplay with the U.S. Copyright Office – and fortunately not the WGA. “Aware of Mr. Kuser’s employment at Defendant Dreamworks and in light of his encouraging support for her idea, Ms. Buggs gave Mr. Kuser a copy of each version of Critter Island to read and comment on,” according to the complaint.

After graduation from AFI, Buggs alleges that she contacted Kuser to set up a meeting for presenting Critter Island at Dreamworks, but instead of his past enthusiasm, Kuser discouraged her attempts and told her to hire an attorney to present the script. In 2003, Plaintiff alleges that she made an animated short film and sent a DVD to Kuser in a further attempt to garner interest, but she heard nothing.

Then in the fall of 2006, she saw a trailer for Flushed Away, a movie about a high society rodent who gets flushed down the toilet into the sewers of London and has to find his way home. The film credits Kuser as “Creative Executive,” which means that the “original concept” for the movie originated with him. Buggs alleges, however, that Kuser “stole that ‘original concept’ for the project from the Plaintiff.” Plaintiff alleges that Flushed Away bears substantial similarity to Critter Island, including the plot, characterization, theme, mood, sequence of events, and setting. The animated feature allegedly grossed in excess of $160 million in theatrical and video distribution, excluding video games, spin-off DVDs and other works based on Flushed Away. The case is Yolanda Buggs v. Dreamworks, Inc. et al., CV09-7070 SJO (C.D. Cal. 2009).