The court also held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment for defendants on the copyright infringement claims where Batiste failed to produce evidence for a reasonable jury to infer that defendants had access to his music or to find striking similarities between his songs and those of defendants. After the district court found no evidence of copyrighting, it granted summary judgment for defendants and then ordered both Batiste and his attorney to pay defendants' attorneys' fees.The Fifth Circuit held that the district court acted well within its discretion in denying Batiste's motion for leave to supplement his summary-judgment opposition. Paul Batiste, a local jazz musician, brought a copyright infringement action against the world-famous hip-hop duo Macklemore & Ryan Lewis. The court dismissed defendant's challenge to the imposition of a sentencing enhancement because it is barred by his appeal waiver.
The court remanded for the district court to reanalyze the government's evidence and to determine the number of counterfeit Life of Luxury (LOL) motherboards actually sold and put into the market to compete with legitimate LOL games and the net profit lost by Scientific Games as a result. Kelley" on Justia LawĪfter defendant pleaded guilty to one count of criminal copyright infringement, the district court sentenced defendant to 46 months' imprisonment and ordered him to pay restitution to the copyright owner, Scientific Games Corporation.After determining that defendant's appeal waiver did not bar defendant's challenge, the Fifth Circuit vacated the restitution order, concluding that the government failed to carry its burden of properly establishing the number of infringing items placed into commerce that defendant was responsible for and the resulting harm to Scientific Games in terms of lost net profit. Di Angelo’s claim necessarily implicates federal law definitions of “Initial ownership” and “Works made for hire.” View "Di Angelo Publications, Inc. The Fifth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the suit. 101 & 201, which the state court lacks jurisdiction to address. Di Angelo claimed resolution of the authorship dispute required interpretation of federal copyright law, including the definitional and ownership provisions in 17 U.S.C. Kelley challenged federal jurisdiction, arguing the claim was premised solely on her alleged breach of the contract, a controversy governed by Texas law. Di Angelo filed a federal suit, seeking a declaration that it owns the copyrights. Di Angelo alleges that it prepared the updated work, then discovered that Kelley was attempting to work directly with Di Angelo’s printer, in violation of the contract.Kelley sued, claiming that Di Angelo overcharged her and alleging that she “is the sole owner of all copyrights.” Di Angelo counterclaimed for breach of contract. Kelley asked Di Angelo for an updated version. Di Angelo sold the initial 1,000-copy print run. Di Angelo claims it wrote the Book while “communicating and/or collaborating with Kelley.” The Book Di Angelo distributed lists only Kelley as the copyright holder.
Kelley provided Di Angelo with a three-page manuscript, detailing her background and outlining the Book’s topics. Di Angelo agreed to publish and distribute Kelley’s then-unwritten Book, with Kelly receiving 50 percent of the net royalties. Brought to you by the Third Circuit Courts, Community, and Rule of Law Committee.Kelley wanted to publish “Hooker to Looker,” to promote her cosmetics business. “What does the Rule of Law mean to you and to our country?”.
#Us fifth circuit court of appeals full
Audio, in full or in part, from any proceeding may not be recorded, broadcast, posted or reproduced in any form. The live stream for arguments scheduled in the Maris and Seitz Courtrooms is made available several minutes before the start of argument. The Court has issued a standing order, dated February 23, 2021, detailing the court's policies and procedures for designating, filing, and maintaining highly sensitive documents.Īudio of Oral Arguments Live Streamed via YouTube. In response to recent widespread breaches of both private sector and government computer systems, federal courts are implementing new procedures to protect highly sensitive sealed documents (HSDs) filed with the courts. Please see Notice under News & Announcements for information and specifics.Ĭourt Order Re: Highly Sensitive Documents Updated information regarding the Third Circuit Clerk’s Office operations is available. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit remains open and operational during the COVID-19 pandemic.