Table of Contents

Volume 1

CHAPTER 1. HISTORICALBACKGROUND

I. THE EARLY HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT§ 1:1 Generally§ 1:1.50 Exploring the ‘balance’ metaphor§ 1:2 Early Venetian privileges and statutes§ 1:3 France§ 1:4 Germany§ 1:5 England and the Statute of Anne; overview§ 1:6 Origin of printing in England and the

consequences of its regulation§ 1:7 —The Stationers’ Company v. The Royal

Patentees§ 1:8 —The Stationers’ Company exercise and loss of

control over the book trade§ 1:9 —Lapse of 1692 Licensing Act and passage of

the Statute of Anne§ 1:10 Jeffrey v. Boosey§ 1:11 Status of unpublished works after the Statute

of Anne§ 1:12 Visual and musical works§ 1:13 —Engravings Act of 1735§ 1:14 —Music§ 1:15 1842 Talfourd Term Extension Act§ 1:16 The states and copyright—Colonial period§ 1:17 —Protection in the states before 1790

II. THE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAUSE§ 1:18 Generally

III. COPYRIGHT ACTS AND AMENDMENTS

A. THE FIRST COPYRIGHT ACT§ 1:19 Generally

xxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

B. STATUTORY REVISION§ 1:20 Generally§ 1:21 1802 Prints and Notice Amendment§ 1:22 1819 Jurisdictional Amendment§ 1:23 1831 general revision§ 1:24 1834 Recordation Amendment§ 1:25 1846 Deposit Amendment§ 1:26 1855 Postal Amendment§ 1:27 1856 Public Performance Amendment§ 1:28 1859 Deposit Amendment§ 1:29 1861 Appeals Amendment§ 1:30 The Confederacy and copyright§ 1:31 1865 Photography and Deposit Amendments§ 1:32 1867 Library of Congress Deposit Amendment§ 1:33 1870 general revision§ 1:34 1873 Jurisdictional Amendment§ 1:35 1874 Print and Notice Amendments§ 1:36 1879 Post Office Amendment§ 1:37 1882 Useful-Articles Notice Amendment§ 1:38 1891 International Copyright Act§ 1:39 1893 Amnesty Act§ 1:40 1895 Government Works and Penalties

Amendments§ 1:41 1897 Amendments§ 1:42 Louisiana Purchase Exposition Act of 1904§ 1:43 Ad Interim Act of 1905§ 1:44 Mexico City convention

C. 1909 COPYRIGHT ACT§ 1:45 Generally

D. AMENDMENTS TO 1909 ACT

§ 1:46 Generally§ 1:47 Townsend Amendment of 1912§ 1:48 1913 Housekeeping Amendment§ 1:49 1914 International Amendments§ 1:50 1919 Retroactive Protection and Ad Interim

Amendment§ 1:51 University Professor’s Act of 1926§ 1:52 Fee Increase Act of 1928§ 1:53 Postal Act of 1983§ 1:54 Prints and Labels Act of 1939§ 1:55 1940 Amendments

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxviii

§ 1:56 —Renewal of contributions to collective works§ 1:57 —Importation§ 1:58 Ad interim protection during World War II§ 1:59 1947 codification§ 1:60 1948 fee increase§ 1:61 1949 relaxation of the manufacturing clause§ 1:62 1952 Nondramatic Literary Works Amendment§ 1:63 Adherence to universal copyright convention§ 1:64 1956 Identifying Material Amendment§ 1:65 1957 Statute of Limitations Amendment§ 1:66 U.S. government liability for infringement§ 1:67 1962 Acts—Extension of renewal term§ 1:68 —Trading with the Enemy Act§ 1:69 Standard Reference Data Act of 1968§ 1:70 1971 Sound Recording Act

E. 1976 ACT§ 1:71 Generally§ 1:72 Study phase of the revision effort§ 1:73 Register’s 1961 report and preparation of a

preliminary draft bill§ 1:74 Legislative phase of the revision effort—1964§ 1:75 —1965§ 1:76 —1966§ 1:77 —1967§ 1:78 —1968–1972: cable television stalls the revision

effort§ 1:79 —1973: hearings resume§ 1:80 —1974§ 1:81 —1975§ 1:82 —1976: passage of the Act§ 1:83 Amendments to 1976 Act—95th Congress:

1977–1978§ 1:84 —96th Congress: 1979–1980§ 1:85 —97th Congress: 1981–1982§ 1:86 —98th Congress: 1983–1984§ 1:87 —99th Congress: 1985–1986§ 1:88 —100th Congress: 1987–1988§ 1:89 — —Berne Implementation Act of 1988§ 1:90 — —Other legislation§ 1:91 —101st Congress: 1989–1990§ 1:92 —102d Congress: 1991–1992§ 1:93 —103d Congress: 1993–1994§ 1:94 —104th Congress: 1995–1996

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 1:95 —105th Congress: 1997–1998§ 1:96 — —First Session: 1997 “technical” amendments§ 1:97 — —Second Session: 1998, the year of the

DMCA and term extension§ 1:98 — — —WIPO Treaties Implementing Legislation§ 1:99 — — —Anti-Circumvention Measures and

Copyright Management Information: Chapter12

§ 1:100 — — —Online Copyright Infringement LiabilityLimitation: Section 512

§ 1:101 — — —WIPO Treaties ImplementingLegislation—Computer Maintenance andRepair: Reversing MAI v. Peak

§ 1:102 — — —Broadcasters’ Ephemeral Digital SoundRecordings Exemption

§ 1:103 — — —Library and Archives Exemption§ 1:104 — — —The Webcasting Statutory License§ 1:105 — — —Assumption of Contractual Obligations

Upon Transfers of Rights in Motion Pictures§ 1:106 — — —Protecting Boat Hull Designs§ 1:107 — — —Effective dates§ 1:108 —106th Congress: 1999–2000§ 1:109 —107th Congress: 2001–2002§ 1:110 —108th Congress: 2003–2004§ 1:111 —109th Congress: 2005–2006§ 1:112 — —Intellectual Property Protection and Courts

Amendments Act of 2004§ 1:113 — —The ART Act§ 1:114 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 110th Congress,

2007–2008§ 1:115 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 111th Congress,

2009–2010§ 1:116 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 112th Congress§ 1:117 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 113th Congress,

2013–2014§ 1:118 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 114th Congress,

2015-2016§ 1:119 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 115th Congress,

2017-2018§ 1:120 Amendments to the 1976 Act: 116th Congress,

2019-2020

CHAPTER 2. STATUTORYINTERPRETATION§ 2:1 The mixed statutory/common-law nature of the

Copyright Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxx

§ 2:2 The 1976 Act in context§ 2:3 Review of statutory enactments—The 1790 Act§ 2:4 —The 1831 revision§ 2:5 —The 1870 revision§ 2:6 —The 1909 Act§ 2:7 —The 1976 Act: consultative legislating§ 2:8 “Micromanaging” versus “delegating” statutes§ 2:9 The structure of the Copyright Act§ 2:10 The nature of statutes§ 2:11 Examination of a statute’s purpose§ 2:12 —How we approach the purpose and meaning

of a text§ 2:13 — —“Equity” of a statute§ 2:14 Equity of the statute and plain meaning§ 2:15 Plain meaning and the order of interpretation§ 2:16 Plain meaning and the common law§ 2:17 Examination of a statute’s purpose—Disputes

over plain meaning§ 2:18 — —The Supreme Court and plain meaning§ 2:19 — —Plain meaning rule: frequently invoked

but rarely followed§ 2:20 — —Can there ever be a plain meaning?§ 2:21 Resolving ambiguity through a holistic

approach§ 2:22 The “ordinary meaning” canard§ 2:23 Approaches to statutory construction§ 2:24 —Literary criticism§ 2:25 —My position§ 2:26 The straw man of legislative history: a

textualist power play§ 2:27 The history of congressional committees and

the generation of committee reports§ 2:28 The nondelegation argument§ 2:29 Use of dictionaries as a guide to statutory

meaning§ 2:30 The history of English-language general-use

dictionaries§ 2:31 The history of English-language law

dictionaries§ 2:32 The errors in relying on legal dictionaries for

word meaning in statutes§ 2:33 Judicial Supremacists’ dictionary shopping§ 2:34 The acontextual nature of dictionary

definitions§ 2:35 The lack of an accepted methodology for using

dictionary definitions

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 2:36 Prescriptive versus descriptive dictionaries§ 2:37 Use of legislative history in copyright cases§ 2:38 The Supreme Court’s use of legislative history

in copyright cases—L.A. Westermann Co. v.Dispatch Printing Company

§ 2:39 Use of legislative history in copyright cases—Jewell-LaSalle Realty Company v. Buck

§ 2:40 —Washingtonian Publishing Co., Inc. v.Pearson

§ 2:41 —Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons§ 2:42 —Mazer v. Stein§ 2:43 —Miller Music Corp. v. Charles N. Daniels,

Inc.§ 2:44 —Fortnightly Corporation v. United Artists

Television, Inc.§ 2:45 —Goldstein v. California§ 2:46 —Twentieth Century Music Corporation v.

Aiken§ 2:47 —Capital Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp§ 2:48 —Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder§ 2:49 —Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation

Enterprises§ 2:50 —Dowling v. United States§ 2:51 —Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats,

Inc.§ 2:52 —Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid§ 2:53 —Stewart v. Abend§ 2:54 —Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone

Service Company§ 2:55 —Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.§ 2:56 —Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.§ 2:57 —Quality King Distributors, Inc. v. L’Anza

Research International, Inc.§ 2:58 —New York Times Company, Inc. v. Tasini§ 2:59 —Eldred v. Ashcroft§ 2:59.20 —Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.§ 2:59.50 Use of Legislative History in copyright cases—

Golan v. Holder§ 2:60 The court’s bait-and-switch approach to the

use of legislative history§ 2:61 Anchoring: Another Problem with Judicial

Supremacists’ Tunnel Vision§ 2:62 “And” versus “or”§ 2:63 Shall versus may

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxxii

Volume 2

CHAPTER 3. COPYRIGHTABLEMATERIAL

I. THE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAUSE

A. THE CLAUSE

§ 3:1 Generally§ 3:2 Basis and purpose of the clause§ 3:3 History of the clause§ 3:4 Structure of the clause

B. “TO PROMOTE THE PROGRESS OFSCIENCE”

§ 3:5 To “promote”§ 3:6 “Progress”§ 3:7 “Science”§ 3:8 Must each work promote the progress of science?

C. ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 8

§ 3:9 Does Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 act as asubstantive limitation on Congress’s power?

D. SECURING FOR LIMITED TIMES, TOAUTHORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TOTHEIR RESPECTIVE WRITINGS

§ 3:10 “Secure”§ 3:11 “Limited times”§ 3:12 “Exclusive rights”§ 3:13 “Writings of authors”§ 3:14 —“Writings”§ 3:15 —The enumerated categories of subject matter§ 3:16 —Does “original work of authorship” exhaust

Congress’s constitutional power?§ 3:17 “Authors”§ 3:18 —Constitutional origins of authorship§ 3:19 —Who may be an “author”?§ 3:20 —“Authors” as those who create original works§ 3:20.50 You can’t be an author of yourself§ 3:21 “Symbolic authorship”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

E. FIXATION§ 3:22 Fixation and authorship§ 3:23 Fixation and copies§ 3:24 Fixation and infringement§ 3:25 Fixation and derivative works

II. ORIGINALITYA. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF ORIGINALITY

IN THE 1976 ACT§ 3:26 Generally

B. ORIGINALITY IS NOT NOVELTY§ 3:27 Generally

C. INDEPENDENT CREATION§ 3:28 Generally§ 3:29 Independent creation of public domain works§ 3:30 “Defensive” independent creation§ 3:31 The lack of any relationship between independent

creation and creativity

D. THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT OFCREATIVITY

§ 3:32 Generally§ 3:33 Why do we have a creativity requirement?§ 3:34 The classic standard of creativity§ 3:35 No dissection at the originality stage§ 3:36 Creativity is an objective determination§ 3:37 Creativity does not involve an inquiry into the

incentives to create§ 3:38 Repeating public domain material is not

creative: the strange case of fabric designs inthe Second Circuit

§ 3:38.50 Works based on nature

E. IS CREATIVITY A QUESTION OF LAW ORFACT?

§ 3:39 Generally

F. ILLICIT, FRAUDULENT, IMMORAL, ANDOBSCENE WORKS

§ 3:40 Works used for illicit purposes

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxxiv

§ 3:41 Fraudulent works§ 3:42 Immoral or obscene works—The early court

decisions§ 3:43 —Legislative proposals§ 3:44 —Early Copyright Office views

G. RELIGIOUS WORKS AND AUTHORS§ 3:45 Generally

III. DERIVATIVE WORKS§ 3:46 Generally§ 3:47 Statutory definition§ 3:47.50 Derivative works distinguished from

compilations§ 3:48 Recasting, transforming, and adapting§ 3:49 Photographs are not derivative works of objects they

depict§ 3:50 Originality and derivative works§ 3:51 Legislative history of Section 103—Statutory

language§ 3:52 Case law on standard of originality for

derivative works§ 3:53 —Second Circuit: confusion worse confounded§ 3:54 —Seventh Circuit§ 3:54.50 —Ninth Circuit§ 3:55 One standard of originality for derivative and

nonderivative works§ 3:55.10 Editing§ 3:56 Originality in alterations from one medium to

another§ 3:57 Technology-driven alterations: derivative

works§ 3:58 Copyright in infringing derivative works: the

Section 103 limitations§ 3:59 “Not pervading the entirety of the work”§ 3:59.50 Copyright owners do not own rights in an

infringing work

IV. CHARACTERISTICS OF COPYRIGHTABLESUBJECT MATTER

§ 3:60 Generally

V. LITERARY WORKS§ 3:61 Definition

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 3:62 Nondramatic vs. dramatic works§ 3:63 Nonfiction narratives

VI. COMPILATIONS AND ELECTRONICDATABASES

§ 3:64 Compilations§ 3:65 —after Feist§ 3:66 —Selection§ 3:67 —Coordination or arrangement§ 3:68 —Infringement§ 3:69 Electronic databases

VII. COMPUTER PROGRAMS§ 3:70 Generally§ 3:71 Copyright Office practices under the 1909 Act§ 3:72 The 1976 Copyright Act§ 3:73 The National Commission on New Technological

Uses of Copyrighted Works§ 3:74 The 1980 software amendments§ 3:75 Computer programs that generate typeface§ 3:76 Case law after the 1980 amendments§ 3:77 Registration for an entire work§ 3:78 Nonliteral elements: structure, sequence, and

organization§ 3:79 The proper approach to determining

copyrightability of computer programs§ 3:80 —Step one: original works of authorship§ 3:81 —Step two: statutory-subject-matter definitions§ 3:82 Computer programs and the idea-expression

dichotomy§ 3:83 —The merger doctrine and computer programs§ 3:84 —Baker v. Selden and computer programs§ 3:85 —Disarray in the lower courts§ 3:86 Third Circuit: Whelan Associates§ 3:87 Second Circuit: Computer Associates§ 3:88 Tenth Circuit§ 3:89 Second Circuit redux: Softel, Inc§ 3:90 Third Circuit retrenchment: Dun & Bradstreet

Software Services§ 3:91 First Circuit: Lotus Development Corp.

VIII. MUSICAL WORKS§ 3:92 Pre-1976 Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxxvi

§ 3:93 The 1976 Act

IX. DRAMATIC WORKS§ 3:94 Generally

X. PANTOMIMES AND CHOREOGRAPHICWORKS

§ 3:95 Generally§ 3:96 Choreography§ 3:97 Pantomime

XI. PICTORIAL, GRAPHIC, AND SCULPTURALWORKS

A. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY§ 3:98 Pre-1909 Act law§ 3:99 The 1909 Act§ 3:100 The 1976 Act§ 3:101 The Berne Implementation Act of 1988

B. TYPES OF WORKS COVERED§ 3:102 Generally§ 3:103 Architectural plans and drawings—The 1909

Act§ 3:104 —The 1976 Act§ 3:105 Architectural plans are not infringed by

constructing an architectural work based onthem

§ 3:105.50 Originality and architectural plans§ 3:106 Registration for architectural plans and

drawings§ 3:107 Architectural works: The 1990 Architectural

Works Copyright Protection Act§ 3:108 —Protected subject matter§ 3:108.10 No requirement of constructability§ 3:109 Architectural works: The 1990 Architectural

Works Copyright Protection Act—Significance of the classification ofarchitectural works in the statute

§ 3:110 —Works of art incorporated in architecturalworks

§ 3:111 —Distribution right§ 3:111.10 The Section 120(a) and Section 120(b)

exemption

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 3:112 Architectural works: The 1990 ArchitecturalWorks Copyright Protection Act—Remedies

§ 3:113 —Preemption of state and local laws§ 3:114 —Retroactivity§ 3:115 —Registration for architectural works§ 3:115.50 Standard of infringement for architectural

works§ 3:116 Relationship between copyright in

architectural plans and copyright in thearchitectural work

§ 3:117 Maps§ 3:117.10 Depictions of live animals or nature§ 3:118 Photographs§ 3:119 Photographs and joint authorship§ 3:119.50 Photographs of other objects are not

derivative works§ 3:120 Prints and labels§ 3:121 Quilts§ 3:122 Sculpture§ 3:123 Web sites

C. DESIGNS OF USEFUL ARTICLES

1. Overview§ 3:124 Generally

2. Pre-1976 Act Law§ 3:125 Statutory provisions—Pre-1909 statutes§ 3:126 —1909 Act: abandonment of the fine-art

limitation§ 3:127 Copyright Office regulations—1910 regulation§ 3:128 —1917 regulation§ 3:129 —1937 Copyright Office reexamination§ 3:130 —1948 regulation§ 3:131 Mazer v. Stein§ 3:132 Regulations after Mazer—1956 regulation§ 3:133 —1959 regulation

3. The 1976 Act§ 3:134 Generally§ 3:135 1976 committee report

4. Interpretation of the 1976 Act§ 3:136 Generally§ 3:137 Copyright Office

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xxxviii

§ 3:138 —Copyright Office’s view of physicalseparability

§ 3:139 —Conceptual separability§ 3:139.10 Deference to the Copyright Office§ 3:140 The courts§ 3:141 —Second Circuit§ 3:141.50 —Third Circuit§ 3:142 —Fourth Circuit§ 3:143 —Fifth Circuit§ 3:143.50 —The Sixth Circuit§ 3:144 —Seventh Circuit§ 3:144.20 —Ninth Circuit§ 3:144.40 —Eleventh Circuit§ 3:144.80 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.§ 3:145 Proper approach—Is there a pictorial,

graphic, or sculptural work and is itembodied in a “useful article”?

§ 3:146 —Separability properly determined§ 3:146.50 Are the separable features original?§ 3:147 Whether an article is useful is a question of

fact

5. Examples of Protectable Designs of UsefulArticles (and a Few That are Not theDesign of a Useful Article)

§ 3:148 Jewelry§ 3:149 Toys and dolls§ 3:150 Two-dimensional works applied to useful

articles§ 3:151 Textiles, rugs, fabric designs, and clothing§ 3:151.50 Food packaging§ 3:152 Masks§ 3:152.50 Helmets and headgear§ 3:152.60 Backpacks§ 3:153 Costumes§ 3:154 Lamps, furniture and hookahs§ 3:154.50 Photographs§ 3:154.60 Technical drawings and plans

XII. MOTION PICTURES AND OTHERAUDIOVISUAL WORKS

§ 3:155 Generally§ 3:156 The 1976 Act§ 3:157 Judicial interpretations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xxxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 3:158 Infomercials

XIII. BROADCASTS§ 3:159 Generally

XIV. SOUND RECORDINGS§ 3:160 Generally§ 3:161 Authorship§ 3:162 Sound recordings as derivative works§ 3:163 Infringement of sound recordings

XV. CHARACTERS§ 3:164 Generally

CHAPTER 4. NONCOPYRIGHTABLEMATERIAL

I. SECTION 102(a)

A. IN GENERAL

§ 4:1 Introduction

B. DE MINIMIS CONTRIBUTIONS: WORDS,TITLES, SHORT PHRASES, ANDORNAMENTATION

§ 4:2 Generally

C. FACTS, RESEARCH, HISTORY, AND THELIKE

§ 4:3 Why we don’t protect facts§ 4:3.50 “Fictional” facts§ 4:4 Protection for historical facts and

interpretations—Historical facts§ 4:5 —Historical interpretation§ 4:6 Factual and authorial estoppel—Factual

estoppel§ 4:7 —Authorial estoppel§ 4:8 —Conclusion on factual and authorial estoppel§ 4:9 Protection for news, data, discoveries, research,

computing devices, and so on§ 4:10 Stock market indexes

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xl

D. FORMAT, LAYOUT, AND STYLE§ 4:11 In general§ 4:11.50 Topics and topics structure§ 4:12 Format§ 4:13 Layout§ 4:14 Style

E. VISUAL WORKS, INCLUDING LOGOS§ 4:15 In general§ 4:16 Color§ 4:17 Familiar symbols and designs§ 4:18 Photographic subjects§ 4:19 Typeface and typography

F. TEXTUAL OR PICTORIAL GAMES§ 4:20 In general

G. ATHLETIC EVENTS AND EXERCISEROUTINES, INCLUDING YOGA

§ 4:21 Athletic events§ 4:22 The pitfalls of analogical reasoning: exercise

routines, including yoga

H. RECIPES§ 4:23 In general§ 4:23.50 Food and recipes

I. SCENES A FAIRE§ 4:24 In general§ 4:25 Scenes a faire applies at the infringement stage§ 4:26 Computer programs and scenes a faire§ 4:27 Scenes a faire and the abstraction-filtration-

comparison analysis§ 4:28 Scenes a faire and merger

II. SECTION 102(b)§ 4:29 Introduction§ 4:30 The role of Section 102(b)§ 4:31 The idea-expression dichotomy§ 4:32 Metaphoric concept of ideas§ 4:33 Personality view of authorship and ideas

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xliK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 4:34 Ideas and problems of proof§ 4:35 Ideas and transaction costs§ 4:36 The idea-expression dichotomy is not a dichotomy

or a test; it is a continuum§ 4:37 —Identifying the idea in a work§ 4:38 —Judge Newman’s Literary Work v. Graphic

Work Distinction§ 4:39 —The Posner-Landes imaginative-discursive

distinction§ 4:40 — —Discursive works§ 4:41 — —Imaginative works§ 4:42 Baker v. Selden and the balance between the

copyright and patent systems§ 4:43 —The balance within the copyright system§ 4:44 The balance between the copyright system and

the First Amendment§ 4:45 Distinguishing idea from expression§ 4:46 Merger: the doctrine that is not§ 4:47 —The proper approach to merger§ 4:48 Product numbers, valuations, and prices§ 4:49 —Product numbers§ 4:50 —Valuations and prices: the fact/value dichotomy§ 4:51 Taxonomies§ 4:52 Blank forms “rule”: another rule that is not—Pre-

1976 Act history§ 4:53 —1976 Act

III. GOVERNMENT WORKS§ 4:54 Introduction§ 4:55 Wheaton v. Peters and Banks v. Manchester—

Wheaton v. Peters§ 4:56 —Banks v. Manchester§ 4:57 Pre-1909 Act law§ 4:58 Public policy reasons for denying protection in

government works§ 4:59 Payment of government salaries and incentives§ 4:60 Private works funded by the U.S. government§ 4:61 —Democratic political theory§ 4:62 —Due process§ 4:63 The 1909 Act§ 4:64 Copyright in unpublished U.S. government works§ 4:65 1983 Post Office amendment§ 4:66 Sovereign immunity: 29 U.S.C.A. § 1498(b)§ 4:67 Standard Reference Data Act of 1968§ 4:68 1976 Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xlii

§ 4:69 —Defining a “work of the United StatesGovernment”

§ 4:70 — —Meaning of “officer” or “employee” of the U.S.government

§ 4:71 —Smithsonian Institute§ 4:72 —What is the United States?§ 4:73 — —When a work is prepared “as a part” of the

official duties of an officer or employee§ 4:74 — —Ownership of copies§ 4:75 —Works by government contractors§ 4:76 — —Assignments of copyright to the U.S.

government§ 4:77 — —Private contractor work for hire§ 4:78 — —Joint works§ 4:79 —U.S. Postal Service§ 4:80 —Overseas assertion of U.S. government

copyright§ 4:81 —State and local government publications§ 4:82 —Filing with or adoption by government agencies§ 4:83 — —Filing a work with a government agency§ 4:84 — —Adoption of a private-sector work by the

government§ 4:85 —Briefs and litigation material§ 4:86 —Publications by foreign governments§ 4:87 —Common-law right to copy public records§ 4:88 —Court reporter transcripts

CHAPTER 5. OWNERSHIP OFCOPYRIGHT

I. INTRODUCTION§ 5:1 Generally§ 5:1.50 Ownership is a Fact Question§ 5:2 Copyright is a bundle of discrete rights

II. AUTHORSHIP

A. IN GENERAL

§ 5:3 Generally

B. JOINT AUTHORSHIP

§ 5:4 Definitions§ 5:5 Joint works and collective works contrasted

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xliiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 5:6 Interdependent and inseparable joint works§ 5:7 Economic consequences of joint ownership§ 5:8 —Controlled composition clauses§ 5:9 —Claims for accounting between co-owners§ 5:10 —Waste, implied negative covenants, and

fiduciary relations between joint owners—Waste

§ 5:11 — —Implied negative covenants§ 5:12 Joint ventures§ 5:13 Fiduciary relationship§ 5:14 Originality and joint authorship§ 5:15 —Misconstruing Childress: each contribution

need not be independently copyrightable§ 5:16 Examples of Childress misconstrued§ 5:17 Nonjoint authors who contribute expression§ 5:18 Nature of the requisite expression in joint

authorship§ 5:18.10 Joint authorship and motion pictures§ 5:19 Interviews§ 5:20 Intent: a key element of joint authorship§ 5:21 —Nature of the requisite intent§ 5:22 —Intent may be satisfied by objective criteria§ 5:23 — —Relative contributions of the parties and

decision-making authority over the work§ 5:24 —Nature of the requisite intent—Dominant

author theory§ 5:25 —Intent may be satisfied by objective

criteria—Billing/credit§ 5:26 — —Written agreements§ 5:27 — —Registration with the Copyright Office§ 5:28 —Subjective intent is not necessarily

irrelevant§ 5:29 —The proper approach to determining intent§ 5:30 —Physical proximity is not required§ 5:31 —Determination of joint authorship is a

question of fact§ 5:32 Joint authorship and the statute of limitations§ 5:33 —Section 507(b)§ 5:34 — —Legislative history§ 5:35 —Case law on joint authorship and statute of

limitations§ 5:36 — —Zuill v. Shanahan: the beginning of big

trouble§ 5:37 — —Merchant v. Levy§ 5:38 — —Problems with Zuill-Merchant

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xliv

§ 5:39 — —The loophole: claim infringement instead§ 5:40 — —Kling v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.:

“nonobvious” owners§ 5:41 —Accrual in ownership claims§ 5:41.50 Violation or discovery accrual§ 5:42 Joint authorship and the statute of

limitations—Tolling and ownership claims§ 5:43 Joint authorship and derivative works§ 5:43.50 Is assertion of joint authorship an affirmative

defense?

C. WORK MADE FOR HIRE§ 5:44 Statutory provision§ 5:45 Contrast with the 1909 Act§ 5:46 Writing requirement of 1976 Act§ 5:47 —Writing requirement for works created by

employees§ 5:48 —Writing requirement for works created on

special order or by commission§ 5:49 —Must work-for-hire agreements be signed

before the work is created?§ 5:49.10 Do third parties have standing to argue

work-for-hire?§ 5:50 Writing requirement of 1976 Act—Effect of the

ESign Act§ 5:51 —Belt-and-suspenders agreements§ 5:52 Employee work made for hire§ 5:53 —Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid§ 5:54 — —Hiring party’s right to control manner

and means by which work is created§ 5:55 — —Skill required§ 5:56 — —Source of instrumentalities and tools§ 5:57 — —Location of work§ 5:58 — —Duration of relationship of parties§ 5:59 — —Whether party has right to assign

additional projects to hired party§ 5:60 — —Extent of hired party’s discretion over

when and how long to work§ 5:61 — —Method of payment§ 5:62 — —Hired party’s right to hire and pay

assistants§ 5:63 — —Whether work is part of regular business

of hiring party§ 5:64 — —Whether hiring party is in business§ 5:65 — —Provision of employee benefits

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xlvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 5:66 — —Tax treatment§ 5:67 — —Other factors§ 5:67.10 —Labor law does not supplant the CCNV

agency analysis§ 5:68 —Post-CCNV interpretation of factors§ 5:69 — —Within the scope of employment§ 5:70 The instance and expense test does not apply

to employees§ 5:71 No teacher exception§ 5:71.50 Partners are not employees of the partnership§ 5:72 Specially ordered or commissioned works§ 5:73 —When is a work specially ordered or

commissioned?§ 5:74 —When is the hiring party the “motivating

factor” in a work’s creation?§ 5:75 —Does the work fall within one of the nine

enumerated categories?§ 5:76 —Must the agreement state that the work is

for hire?§ 5:77 —Check endorsement§ 5:77.50 Email§ 5:78 Consequences of rescission of an agreement

containing a work-for-hire agreement§ 5:78.50 Works of the United States government§ 5:79 May an individual have two employers?§ 5:80 Unformed and dissolved corporations§ 5:80.50 Religious and other nonprofit organizations§ 5:81 Statute of limitations§ 5:82 Sound recordings§ 5:83 —Different copyright acts apply to different

sound recordings§ 5:84 —Work for hire under the Copyright Act of

1909§ 5:85 —1976 Act§ 5:86 —Employer-employee prong§ 5:87 —The instance and expense test under the

second work-for-hire prong§ 5:88 —Sound recordings as one of the enumerated

potential work-for-hire categories§ 5:89 —Consideration as work for hire in the

legislative history of the 1976 Act§ 5:90 —Contributions to collective works as

collective works§ 5:91 —As noncollective-work compilations§ 5:92 —1999 Amendment

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xlvi

§ 5:93 —October 2000 repeal§ 5:94 Effect of a certificate of registration§ 5:95 Is work for hire a question of fact or law?§ 5:95.50 Is the assertion of work-for-hire status an

affirmative defense?

III. SHAREHOLDERS§ 5:96 Generally

IV. DISTINCTION BETWEEN OWNERSHIP OFCOPYRIGHT AND OWNERSHIP OF COPIES:SECTION 202

§ 5:97 Distinction between the tangible object and theintangible intellectual property

§ 5:98 1976 Act§ 5:99 Origins of the distinction between the “copy” and

the “work”§ 5:100 Tension between “copy” and “copyright”

V. OWNERSHIP BY ASSIGNMENT§ 5:101 Structure of ownership and transfer of rights§ 5:102 —The “one copyright” fallacy§ 5:103 Exclusive licensees may transfer their interest—

Gardner v. Nike, Sybersound Records, Inc. v.UAV Corporation, and Corbello v. DeVito

§ 5:104 Transfer of the mere right to sue—Silvers v.Sony Pictures Entertainment

§ 5:105 Structure of ownership and transfer of rights—Why doesn’t the Ninth Circuit correctly applythe Copyright Act?

§ 5:106 —Writing requirement: section 204(a)§ 5:107 — —Form of transfers§ 5:108 — —Content of transfers: use of magic words§ 5:109 — —Transfer formalities§ 5:110 — —Check endorsements as transfers§ 5:111 — —After-the-fact transfers: no

contemporaneous requirement§ 5:112 —Retroactive licenses§ 5:113 —Preexisting causes of action§ 5:114 —Can third parties challenge the sufficiency of a

transfer under section 204(a)?§ 5:115 —Construction of transfers involving

exploitation by future technologies§ 5:116 —Operation of law and section 201(e)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xlviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 5:117 —Derivative works

VI. LICENSES§ 5:118 Types of copyright licenses—Affirmative

defense§ 5:118.50 Which act governs transfers?§ 5:119 Types of copyright licenses—Exclusive rights:

transfers of ownership before the 1909 Act§ 5:120 —Exclusive rights: indivisibility and the 1909

Act§ 5:121 —Exclusive rights: divisibility, transfers,

standing, and the 1976 Act—Introduction§ 5:122 Divisibility—Legislative history of divisibility

in the 1976 Act§ 5:123 —Construction of divisibility under the 1976

Act, including standing§ 5:124 Revocation of exclusive licenses§ 5:125 Administration and agency rights, and

interests such as options, rights of firstrefusal, and agreements to share royaltiesare not exclusive rights

§ 5:126 Conditions on and use outside scope ofexclusive licenses

§ 5:127 Nonexclusive licenses§ 5:128 Nonexclusive licenses: revocation of

nonexclusive licenses§ 5:129 Are copyright assignments construed under

federal or state law?§ 5:130 Use of extrinsic evidence§ 5:131 Implied licenses§ 5:132 —Are implied licenses revocable?§ 5:133 Burden of proof: Scope of a license versus its

existence§ 5:134 Perpetual licenses§ 5:135 Foreign transfers: section 204(b)§ 5:136 Champerty§ 5:137 Contribution to collective works: the section

201(c) privilege§ 5:138 Nature of the section 201(c) privilege§ 5:139 Construction of section 201(c)§ 5:140 —Section 201(c) does not authorize inclusion

of freelancers’ works in third parties’ works§ 5:141 —Section 201(c) grants publishers only a

nontransferable privilege, not an exclusiveright

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xlviii

§ 5:142 —Legislative history of section 201(c)§ 5:142.50 Legislative history of Section 201(c): the

Register’s 1961 report and recommendationsand comments thereon

§ 5:142.60 Legislative history of Section 201(c): the 1963Preliminary Draft Bill and CommentsThereon

§ 5:142.70 The 1964 revision bills and “revisions”§ 5:142.80 The 1965 bills, the final version of the bill,

the register’s Supplementary Report, andthe 1966 House Judiciary Committee report

§ 5:142.90 Legislative history of Section 201(c): the finalcommittee reports

§ 5:142.95 Greenberg v. National Geographic Society§ 5:143 Construction of section 201(c)—When

infringement occurs§ 5:144 Recordation of transfers of ownership: section

205§ 5:145 1976 Act§ 5:146 —Recordation as establishing priority

between conflicting transfers§ 5:147 — —Conflicting transfers of exclusive rights:

section 205(d)§ 5:148 — —Conflicts between an exclusive license

and nonexclusive license: section 205(e)§ 5:149 —Priority in cases where the transferor goes

bankrupt§ 5:150 —IRS liens§ 5:151 —Recordation as a prerequisite to suit§ 5:152 Beneficial ownership§ 5:153 Ownership by constructive trust§ 5:154 Abandonment, forfeiture, and waiver§ 5:155 Abandonment§ 5:156 Forfeiture§ 5:157 Waiver

Volume 3

CHAPTER 6. FORMALITIES

I. OVERVIEW

A. THE ACT

§ 6:1 In general

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xlixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 6:2 Formalities§ 6:3 U.S. formalities

B. RATIONALE FOR FORMALITIES§ 6:4 In general§ 6:5 Notice§ 6:6 Deposit§ 6:7 Registration

C. WHICH ACT APPLIES?§ 6:8 In general§ 6:9 Publication§ 6:10 Notice§ 6:11 Deposit for the Library of Congress§ 6:12 Registration§ 6:13 Recordation§ 6:14 Manufacturing clause

II. HISTORY OF FORMALITIES BEFORE THE1976 ACT

§ 6:15 Generally§ 6:16 France, Italy, and England§ 6:17 Pre-1790 state statutes in the United States§ 6:18 The Constitution§ 6:19 The 1790 Act

III. REVISIONS OF THE 1790 ACT§ 6:20 The 1802 Act§ 6:21 1831 general revision§ 6:22 1846§ 6:23 1859§ 6:24 1865§ 6:25 1870: centralization of copyright

administration in the Library of Congress§ 6:26 1874§ 6:27 1891: international copyright§ 6:28 1905: ad interim protection§ 6:29 The 1909 Act§ 6:30 Publication under the copyright acts before

1976§ 6:31 Limited versus general publication§ 6:31.50 Publication and works of architecture

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

l

§ 6:32 Publication and exhibition of works of art§ 6:33 Publication and performance§ 6:34 Publication of musical compositions embodied

phonorecords§ 6:35 Publication and derivative works§ 6:36 Notice under the 1909 Act§ 6:37 Form of the notice§ 6:38 Year date of the notice§ 6:39 Antedated notices§ 6:40 Postdated notices§ 6:41 Name of the copyright owner§ 6:42 Position of the notice§ 6:43 Notice in collective works as covering

individual contributions§ 6:44 Notice for works first published abroad§ 6:45 Abandonment§ 6:46 1954: The Universal Copyright Convention

IV. THE 1976 ACT§ 6:47 In general§ 6:48 Publication under the 1976 Act§ 6:49 —Statutory definition§ 6:50 —Limited versus general publication§ 6:51 —Publication by display§ 6:52 —Publication by performance§ 6:53 —Publication of musical compositions

embodied in phonorecords§ 6:54 —Publication and distribution of sound

recordings§ 6:55 —Publication of derivative works§ 6:55.40 —Online and Internet simultaneous

publication§ 6:56 Notice under the 1976 Act§ 6:57 —Section 401(a): general requirements§ 6:58 —Section 401(b): form of notice§ 6:59 —Section 401(b)(1): symbol§ 6:60 —Section 401(b)(2): year date§ 6:61 —Section 401(b)(3): name§ 6:62 —Section 401(c): position§ 6:63 —Section 402: phonorecords of sound

recordings§ 6:64 —Section 403: government works§ 6:65 —Section 404: collective works§ 6:66 —Unit of publication rule

TABLE OF CONTENTS

liK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 6:67 Section 405: omission of notice§ 6:68 —Section 405(a)(1): omission of notice from a

“relatively small number of copies”§ 6:69 —Section 405(a)(2): registration of the work

within five years of publication without noticebut with reasonable efforts to add notice afteromission discovered

§ 6:70 —Section 405(a)(3): notice omitted in violationof agreement

§ 6:71 —Section 405(b): effect of omission on innocentinfringers

§ 6:72 —Section 405(c): removal of notice withoutauthority of the copyright owner

§ 6:73 Section 406: errors in the name and/or date ofa notice

V. THE BERNE IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF1988

§ 6:74 Impact on 1976 Act notice provisions§ 6:75 —Innocent infringement defense and mitigation

of damages§ 6:76 —Access to government works removes innocent

infringer defense§ 6:77 Section 405(a) and 405(b) curative notice

provisions§ 6:78 Section 401(d) statutory damages§ 6:79 Visual artists’ exception to Berne relaxation of

formalities

VI. THE URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENTS ACT§ 6:80 U.S. implementing legislation

VII. THE WIPO COPYRIGHT ANDPERFORMANCES AND PHONOGRAMSTREATIES IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF1998

§ 6:81 In general

CHAPTER 7. DURATION

I. INTRODUCTION§ 7:1 History§ 7:2 Policy questions concerning the proper term of

protection

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lii

II. CONCEPTUAL APPROACHES TODURATION

§ 7:3 Basic approaches

III. HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS OF FEDERALCOPYRIGHT LEGISLATION

§ 7:4 The battle of the booksellers§ 7:5 Preconstitutional state statutes§ 7:6 The battle of the booksellers—The constitution

IV. EARLY LEGISLATION§ 7:7 The 1790 Act§ 7:8 The 1831 general revision§ 7:9 The 1870 general revision

V. THE 1909 GENERAL REVISION§ 7:10 In general§ 7:10.50 Does federal or state law apply to construing a

renewal assignment?§ 7:11 Renewal under the 1909 Act: unanswered

questions§ 7:12 —Could the author, during the first term,

assign the renewal term?§ 7:13 — —Death of the author before the renewal

term vested§ 7:14 —Can the author, by will, bequeath the

copyright to persons outside the statutorysuccessor class?

§ 7:15 —How do the statutory successors share therenewal right?

§ 7:16 —Who is the proper renewal claimant?—Theauthor

§ 7:17 — —Widow, widower, or children§ 7:18 — —Executor§ 7:19 — —Next of kin§ 7:20 Renewal under the 1909 Act: provisos—

Proprietor§ 7:21 —Posthumous works§ 7:22 —Composite works§ 7:23 —Work copyrighted by a corporate body§ 7:24 —Work originally copyrighted by an employer§ 7:24.50 Duration for 1909 Act works first published

overseas

TABLE OF CONTENTS

liiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

VI. RENEWAL UNDER THE 1976 ACT§ 7:25 The proper time to renew and accomplishing

renewal§ 7:26 Renewal rights and vesting§ 7:27 Conclusion on renewal

VII. GROUNDWORK FOR THE 1976 ACT§ 7:28 Interim extensions§ 7:29 The Register of Copyrights’ 1961 report§ 7:30 The 1963 preliminary draft bill§ 7:31 The 1964 revision bills§ 7:32 The 1965 revision bill

VIII. THE 1976 ACT

A. DURATION OF TERMS§ 7:33 Generally

B. END OF YEAR EXPIRATION OF TERM:SECTION 305

§ 7:34 Generally§ 7:35 Works created on or after January 1, 1978—

Individual authors: section 302(a)§ 7:36 —Joint authors: section 302(b)§ 7:37 —Works for hire, anonymous and pseudonymous

works: section 302(c)§ 7:38 Works unpublished and unregistered on January

1, 1978: section 303(a)§ 7:39 Works published before January 1, 1978: section

304§ 7:40 —Works in their first term on January 1, 1978:

section 304(a)§ 7:41 —Works in their renewal term on January 1,

1978: section 304(b)

C. TERMINATION OF TRANSFERS ANDLICENSES: SECTIONS 203 AND 304(c)

§ 7:42 Introduction§ 7:43 Section 304(c)—Statutory§ 7:44 —Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder; entitlement to

royalties from derivative works§ 7:45 —Content of termination notices§ 7:46 Section 304(d)—Agreements to the contrary

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

liv

§ 7:46.50 “Moment of freedom” theory§ 7:47 Section 304(c)—Future grants: section

304(c)(6)(D)§ 7:48 Section 203—Statutory§ 7:49 Distinctions between Sections 203 and 304(c)

IX. THE COPYRIGHT RENEWAL ACT OF 1992§ 7:50 Generally

X. THE URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENTS ACTAS AMENDED BY THE WIPO COPYRIGHTAND THE WIPO PHONOGRAMS ANDTREATIES ACTS

§ 7:51 Generally

XI. THE SONNY BONO COPYRIGHT TERMEXTENSION ACT

§ 7:52 Introduction

A. DURATION OF TERMS§ 7:53 Works created on or after January 1, 1978—

Individual authors: section 302(a)§ 7:54 —Joint authors: section 302 (b)§ 7:55 —Works for hire, anonymous and pseudonymous

works§ 7:56 —Presumption as to author’s death§ 7:57 Works unpublished and unregistered on January

1, 1978: section 303(a)§ 7:58 Works published before January 1, 1978: section

304§ 7:59 Works in their first term of publication on

January 1, 1978: section 304(a)§ 7:60 Works in their renewal term on January 1, 1978:

section 304(b)

B. TERMINATION OF TRANSFERS§ 7:61 Sections 203(a)(2) and 304(c)(2)§ 7:62 New Section 304(d)

C. PRE-FEBRUARY 15, 1972, SOUNDRECORDINGS

§ 7:63 In general

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

CHAPTER 8. OVERVIEW OF EXCLUSIVERIGHTS

I. INTRODUCTION§ 8:1 Generally§ 8:2 Copyright and new technologies§ 8:3 The purpose of new rights§ 8:4 Limitations on rights§ 8:5 —Compulsory licenses§ 8:6 —Exemptions§ 8:7 —Fair use privilege§ 8:8 The grant of rights is to be flexibly applied

II. THE COMMON LAW§ 8:9 Generally

III. STATUTES

A. EARLY STATUTES

§ 8:10 The Statute of Anne§ 8:11 The Continental Congress and the early state

statutes§ 8:12 The Constitution and the First Copyright Act§ 8:13 The 1802 Act§ 8:14 The 1831 Act§ 8:15 The 1856 Act§ 8:16 The 1870 Act§ 8:17 The 1897 Act

B. LATER STATUTES

§ 8:18 The 1909 Act§ 8:19 The 1952 public performance right for

nondramatic literary works§ 8:20 The 1971 sound recording amendment§ 8:21 The 1976 Act§ 8:22 —The architecture of the 1976 Act§ 8:23 —Transmissions and simultaneous violation of

one or more rights§ 8:24 —Rights not conditionally related§ 8:25 The Visual Artists’ Rights Act of 1990§ 8:26 The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992§ 8:27 The Uruguay Round Agreements Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lvi

§ 8:28 The Digital Performance Right in SoundRecordings Act of 1995

§ 8:29 The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998

CHAPTER 9. THE REPRODUCTIONRIGHT

I. THE NATURE OF INFRINGEMENT§ 9:1 Why there is no definition of infringement§ 9:2 Infringement is a creature of statute§ 9:3 The role of the courts

II. ELEMENTS OF A PRIMA FACIE CASE OFINFRINGEMENT OF THE REPRODUCTIONRIGHT

§ 9:4 Generally§ 9:5 Intent to infringe is not required§ 9:5.50 Volitional conduct distinguished§ 9:6 Protected subject matter§ 9:7 Presumptions provided by a certificate of

registration§ 9:8 Elements of proper registration§ 9:9 Proper deposit copy§ 9:10 Foreign works and registration§ 9:11 How to rebut the registration presumption§ 9:12 Protected subject matter—Originality§ 9:13 —Derivative works and the certificate of

registration§ 9:14 Facts stated in the certificate§ 9:15 Ownership of the reproduction right§ 9:16 Unauthorized copying by the defendant of a

material amount of expression§ 9:17 —Purpose of the requirement§ 9:18 —Fictitious entries and other anomalies§ 9:19 —Probative similarity: almost right§ 9:20 —Common errors as a method of proving

copying§ 9:21 —Direct proof of copying is unnecessary§ 9:22 Access§ 9:23 —Definition§ 9:24 —The two methods of establishing access:

direct and indirect§ 9:25 —Inferential access

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 9:26 —General availability of plaintiff’s work§ 9:27 —Attendance at trade shows, showrooms or

publication in trade periodicals or nationalpublications

§ 9:28 —Architectural works§ 9:29 —Through third parties§ 9:30 —Vicarious inference and the corporate receipt

doctrine§ 9:31 —Access through deposit with a library or

other depository source§ 9:32 Independent creation§ 9:33 —Hein v. Harris§ 9:34 —Fred Fisher, Inc. v. Dillingham§ 9:35 —Arnstein v. Edward B. Marks Music Group§ 9:36 Independent creation is not an affirmative

defense§ 9:37 Access after defendant’s work is created§ 9:38 Striking similarity—The anti-doctrine—

Arnstein v. Porter and inference on inference§ 9:39 —Cases are usually brought by delusional

plaintiffs§ 9:40 —Striking similarity arose out of an obsolete

view of summary judgment§ 9:41 —Striking similarity is inconsistent with basic

rules of evidence and with independentcreation

§ 9:42 —Striking similarity is illogical§ 9:43 —The evils of expert witnesses in striking

similarity cases§ 9:44 —Definition§ 9:45 —Recent case law§ 9:46 — —The First Circuit§ 9:47 — —The Second Circuit§ 9:48 — —The Third Circuit§ 9:49 — —The Fourth Circuit§ 9:50 — —The Fifth Circuit§ 9:51 — —The Sixth Circuit§ 9:52 — —The Seventh Circuit§ 9:53 — —The Eighth Circuit§ 9:54 — —The Ninth Circuit§ 9:55 — —Tenth Circuit§ 9:56 — —Eleventh Circuit§ 9:57 — —District of Columbia Circuit§ 9:58 —Conclusion§ 9:59 Copying of a material amount of expression

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lviii

§ 9:60 —De minimis uses§ 9:61 —Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films§ 9:62 —Legislative history of the definition of “copy”§ 9:63 —Legislative history of the definition of “fixed”§ 9:63.50 —Cartoon Network LP, LLLP v. CSC Holdings,

Inc.§ 9:64 —Substantial similarity: quantitative and

qualitative takings§ 9:65 Materiality is judged by reference to plaintiff’s

work§ 9:66 When more than one work has been infringed;

aggregate copying§ 9:67 Copying from common sources§ 9:68 Copying plaintiff’s work from a third party§ 9:69 Ordinary observer§ 9:70 Intended audience§ 9:71 Total-concept-and-feel test§ 9:72 Total concept and feel and factual works§ 9:73 More discerning observer§ 9:74 Conclusion on more discerning observer test§ 9:75 Similarities versus dissimilarities§ 9:76 —Lists§ 9:77 —Conclusion dissimilarities§ 9:78 —Substantial similarity is determined by the

final version of defendant’s work§ 9:79 Experts—The use and misuse of experts§ 9:80 —Early uses of experts§ 9:81 —Contemporary use of experts at the

infringement stage§ 9:82 —Experts and striking similarity§ 9:83 Use of survey evidence§ 9:84 Newspaper articles§ 9:85 What cognitive scientists can teach us about

similarity§ 9:86 Substantial similarity is a fact question§ 9:86.50 Substantial similarity and Rule 12(b)(6)§ 9:87 Summary judgment§ 9:88 Standard of review§ 9:89 Errant standards and tests—Introduction§ 9:90 —Fragmented literal similarity and

comprehensive nonliteral similarity§ 9:91 Errant standards and test—Inverse ratio

theory§ 9:92 Prior act evidence§ 9:93 Errant standards and tests—“Abstractions

test”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 9:94 A note on some errant standards and tests—Abstraction-filtration-comparison: “bile demcabbage down”

§ 9:95 Errant standards and tests—“Supersubstantialsimilarity” and “Virtual identity”

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF SECTION106(1)

§ 9:96 Generally

IV. EARLY PRINCIPLES§ 9:97 The courts’ efforts to encourage learning§ 9:98 Fair abridgment§ 9:99 Determining when a work was a “copy” of

another§ 9:100 The problem of independent creation and intent

to copy

V. EARLY AMERICAN CASE LAW§ 9:101 Generally§ 9:102 Folsom v. Marsh§ 9:103 Emerson v. Davies§ 9:104 Webb v. Powers§ 9:105 Perris v. Hexamer§ 9:106 Drury v. Ewing§ 9:107 Stowe v. Thomas§ 9:108 Bracken v. Rosenthal§ 9:109 Lawrence v. Dana§ 9:110 Keene v. Wheatley§ 9:111 Richardson v. Miller§ 9:112 Jollie v. Jaques§ 9:113 Daly v. Palmer and the origins of modern

copyright

VI. TWENTIETH-CENTURY ATTEMPTS TOFORMULATE GENERAL RULES ONINFRINGEMENT

§ 9:114 Generally§ 9:115 Early Second Circuit opinions§ 9:116 Nichols v. Universal Pictures Corp.§ 9:117 Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp.§ 9:118 Arnstein v. Porter§ 9:119 Heim v. Universal Pictures Co.

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lx

VII. APPROACHES TO SUBSTANTIALSIMILARITY

A. THE SUPREME COURT

§ 9:120 Generally§ 9:121 Perris v. Hexamer§ 9:122 Callaghan v. Myers§ 9:123 White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co.§ 9:124 Mazer v. Stein§ 9:125 Harper & Row, Publisher, Inc. v. Nation

Enterprises§ 9:126 Feist Publications, Inc. v Rural Telephone

Service Co.§ 9:127 MGM v. Grokster, Ltd.

B. THE FIRST CIRCUIT

§ 9:128 Generally§ 9:129 O’Neill v. Dell Publishing Co.§ 9:130 Concrete Machinery Co. v. Classic Lawn

Ornaments, Inc.§ 9:131 Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland and

International, Inc.§ 9:132 Grubb v. KMS Patriots, L.P.§ 9:133 CMM Cable Rep v. Ocean Coast Properties,

Inc.§ 9:134 Segrets, Inc. v. Gillman Knitwear Co.§ 9:135 Yankee Candle Co. v. Bridgewater Candle Co.§ 9:136 Johnson v. Gordon§ 9:136.10 Situation Management Systems, Inc. v. ASP.

Consulting LLC§ 9:136.20 Coquico, Inc. v. Rodriguez-Miranda

C. THE SECOND CIRCUIT

§ 9:137 Generally§ 9:138 Introduction§ 9:139 Continental Casualty Co. v. Beardsley§ 9:140 Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner

Corp.§ 9:141 Millworth Converting Corp. v. Slifka§ 9:142 Arc Music Corp. v. Lee§ 9:143 Stuff v. E.C. Publications, Inc.§ 9:144 Ideal Toy Corp. v. Fab-Lu, Ltd.§ 9:145 Puddu v. Buonamici Statuary, Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 9:146 Herbert Rosenthal Jewelry Corp. v. HonoraJewelry Co.

§ 9:147 Novelty Textile Mills, Inc. v. Joan FabricsCorp.

§ 9:148 Reyher v. Children’s Television Workshop§ 9:149 Wainwright Securities, Inc. v. Wall Street

Transcript Corp., and Hoehling v. UniversalCity Studios, Inc.

§ 9:150 Warner Brothers, Inc. v. AmericanBroadcasting Cos.

§ 9:151 Walker v. Time Life Films, Inc.§ 9:152 Gaste v. Kaiserman§ 9:153 Folio Impressions, Inc. v. Byer California§ 9:154 Fisher-Price, Inc. v. Well-Made Toy

Manufacturing Corp.§ 9:155 Knitwaves, Inc. v. Lollytogs, Ltd.§ 9:156 Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television,

Inc.§ 9:157 Sandoval v. New Line Cinema Corp.§ 9:158 Repp v. Webber§ 9:159 Langman Fabrics v. Graff Californiawear§ 9:160 Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Inc. v. Comline

Business Data, Inc.§ 9:161 Hamil America, Inc. v. GFI§ 9:162 Tufenkian Import/Export Ventures, Inc. v.

Einstein Moomjy, Inc.§ 9:163 Attia v. Society of the New York Hospital§ 9:164 Jorgensen v. Epic/Sony Records§ 9:164.10 Zelewski v. Cicero Builder Dev., Inc.

D. THE THIRD CIRCUIT

§ 9:165 Generally§ 9:166 Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. Salkeld§ 9:167 Franklin v. National Wildlife Art Exchange,

Inc.§ 9:168 Testa v. Janssen§ 9:169 Educational Testing Services v. Katzman§ 9:170 Whelan Associates, Inc. v. Jaslow Dental

Laboratory§ 9:171 Ford Motor Co. v. Summit Motor Products,

Inc.§ 9:172 Dun & Bradstreet Software Services, Inc. v.

Grace Consulting, Inc.§ 9:173 Kay Berry, Inc. v. Taylor Gifts, Inc.§ 9:173.50 Tanskley v. Daniels

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxii

E. THE FOURTH CIRCUIT§ 9:174 Generally§ 9:175 Reed v. Carusi§ 9:176 Lewis v. Kroger Co.§ 9:177 Champion Map Corp. v. Twin Printing Co.§ 9:178 Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World§ 9:179 M. Kramer Manufacturing Co. v. Andrews§ 9:180 Keeler Brass Co. v. Continental Brass Co.§ 9:181 Dawson v. Hinshaw Music, Inc.§ 9:182 Lyons Partnership, L.P. v. Morris Costumes,

Inc.§ 9:183 Johnson v. Automotive Ventures§ 9:184 Towler v. Sayles§ 9:185 Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens, Inc.§ 9:185.50 Charles W. Ross Builder, Inc. v. Olsen Fine

Home Building, LLC§ 9:185.60 Copeland v. Bieber

F. THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

§ 9:186 Generally§ 9:187 Ferguson v. National Broadcasting Co.§ 9:188 Miller v. Universal City Studios, Inc.§ 9:189 Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. v. Leadership Software, Inc.§ 9:190 Engineering Dynamics, Inc. v. Structure

Softwares, Inc.§ 9:191 DSC Communications Corp. v. DGI Technologies,

Inc.§ 9:192 Creations Unlimited, Inc. v. McCain

G. THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

§ 9:193 Generally§ 9:194 Introduction§ 9:195 Mathews Conveyer Co. v. Palmer-Bee Co.§ 9:196 Blumcraft of Pittsburgh v. Newman Brothers,

Inc.§ 9:197 Wickham v. Knoxville International Energy

Exposition, Inc.§ 9:198 Mihalek v. Michigan§ 9:199 Marigold Foods, Inc. v. Purity Dairies, Inc.§ 9:200 Trapani v. CBS Records, Inc.§ 9:201 Ellis v. Diffie§ 9:202 Benton v. Decotex, Inc.§ 9:203 Kohus v. Mariol

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 9:204 Murray Hill Publications, Inc. v. TwentiethCentury Fox Film Corp.

§ 9:205 Raum v. Norwood§ 9:206 Fogerty v. MGM Group Holdings Corp., Inc.§ 9:207 Stromback v. New Line Cinema§ 9:208 Winfield Collection Ltd. v. Gemmy Corp.§ 9:209 Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films§ 9:209.20 Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. UMG Recordings,

Inc.§ 9:209.50 Jones v. Blige

H. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT§ 9:210 Generally§ 9:211 Chicago Record-Herald Co. v. Tribune

Association§ 9:212 Edwards & Deutsch Lithographing Co. v.

Boorman§ 9:213 Crume v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co.§ 9:214 Toksvig v. Bruce Publishing Co. and

Eisenchiml v. Fawcett Publications, Inc.§ 9:215 Cholvin v. B. & F. Music Co.§ 9:216 Scott v. WKJG, Inc.§ 9:217 Atari, Inc. v. North American Philips

Consumer Electronics Corp.§ 9:218 Selle v. Gibb§ 9:219 Nash v. Columbia Broadcasting Systems§ 9:220 Wildlife Express Corp. v. Carol Wright Sales,

Inc.§ 9:221 NLFC, Inc. v. Devcom Mid-America§ 9:222 Ty Inc. v. GMA Accessories, Inc.§ 9:223 Susan Wakeen Doll Co. v. Ashton-Drake

Galleries§ 9:223.50 JCW Investment, Inc. v. Novelty, Inc.§ 9:223.60 Peters v. West§ 9:223.70 Design Basics, LLC v. Lexington Homes, Inc.

I. THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

§ 9:224 Generally§ 9:225 Introduction§ 9:226 Ansehl v. Puritan Pharmaceutical Co.§ 9:227 Johns & Johns Printing Co. v. Paull-Pioneer v.

Music Corp.§ 9:228 Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. v. Dieckhaus§ 9:229 Funkhouser v. Loew’s Inc.

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxiv

§ 9:230 Nucor Corp. v. Tennessee Forging Steel Service,Inc.

§ 9:231 Hartman v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.§ 9:232 Moore v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.§ 9:233 Taylor Corporation v. Four Seasons Greetings,

LLC§ 9:234 Rottlund Company, Inc. v. Pinnacle Corporation

J. THE NINTH CIRCUIT§ 9:235 Generally§ 9:236 The Krofft decision§ 9:237 Baxter v. MCA, Inc.§ 9:238 Shaw v. Lindheim§ 9:239 Pasillas v. MacDonald’s Corp.§ 9:240 Brown Bag Software v. Symantec Corp.§ 9:241 Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp§ 9:242 Smith v. Jackson§ 9:243 Three Boys Music Corp. v. Bolton§ 9:244 Metcalf v. Bochco§ 9:245 Rice v. Fox Broadcasting Co.§ 9:246 Swirsky v. Carey§ 9:247 Newton v. Diamond§ 9:247.10 Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc.§ 9:247.20 L.A. Printex Industries, Inc. v. Aeropostale,

Inc.§ 9:247.30 Williams v. Gaye§ 9:247.40 Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin

K. THE TENTH CIRCUIT§ 9:248 Generally§ 9:249 Dorsey v. Old Surety Life Insurance Co.§ 9:250 A potpourri of district court cases§ 9:251 Autoskill Inc. v. National Educational

Support Systems, Inc.§ 9:252 Gates Rubber Co. v. Bando Chemical

Industries, Ltd.§ 9:253 Cartier v. Jackson§ 9:254 Country Kids ’N City Slicks, Inc. v. Sheen§ 9:255 Fisher v. United Feature Syndicate, Inc.§ 9:256 TransWestern Publishing v. Multimedia

Marketing Associates§ 9:257 Jacobsen v. Deseret Book Co.§ 9:257.50 Meshwerks, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A.,

Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 9:257.60 La Resolana Architects, PA v. Reno, Inc.§ 9:257.70 Blehm v. Jacobs

L. THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

§ 9:258 Generally§ 9:259 Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Toy

Loft, Inc.§ 9:260 Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v.

Associated Telephone Directory§ 9:261 BellSouth Advertising & Publishing Corp. v.

Donnelley Information Publishing Inc.§ 9:262 Benson v. Coca-Cola Co.§ 9:263 Bateman v. Mnemonics, Inc.§ 9:264 Leigh v. Warner Bros., Inc.§ 9:265 Sun Trust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co.§ 9:266 Palmer v. Braun§ 9:266.50 Oravec v. Sunny Isles Luxury Ventures, L.C.§ 9:266.60 Peter Letterese And Associates, Inc. v. World

Institute Of Scientology Enterprises§ 9:266.70 Watt v. Butler

M. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

§ 9:267 Generally§ 9:268 Sherrill v. Grieves§ 9:269 Carr v. National Capital Press, Inc.§ 9:270 Sheets v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.§ 9:271 Miner v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance

Co. of Wisconsin§ 9:272 Costello v. Loew’s, Inc.§ 9:273 Lapsley v. American Institute of Certified Public

Accountants§ 9:274 Reader’s Digest Association, Inc. v. Conservative

Digest, Inc.§ 9:275 Stenograph LLC v. Bossard Associates, Inc.§ 9:276 Sturdza v. United Arab Emirates§ 9:277 Atkins v. Fischer

N. THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THEFEDERAL CIRCUIT AND THE COURT OFFEDERAL CLAIMS

§ 9:278 Generally

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxvi

Volume 4

CHAPTER 10. THE FAIR USE DEFENSE

I. GENERALLY§ 10:1 Statutory provision§ 10:1.50 The purpose and role of fair use§ 10:1.60 Commentary: Fair use is good for creativity

and innovation

II. ORIGINS AND PURPOSE OF FAIR USE§ 10:2 Generally§ 10:3 Law vs. equity: right to jury trial§ 10:4 Folsom v. Marsh§ 10:5 —Factor 1: “nature and objects of the selections

made”§ 10:6 —Factor 2: “quantity and value of the materials

used”§ 10:7 —Factor 3: “degree in which the use may

prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, orsupersede the objects, of the original work”

III. STATUTORY RECOGNITION OF FAIR USE§ 10:8 “Codification” versus “statutory recognition”:

why the distinction is important§ 10:8.25 Common law copyright infringement actions§ 10:8.50 Fair use as a common-law analysis§ 10:8.60 Fair use is not an affirmative right§ 10:9 Fair use as affirmative defense§ 10:9.10 Fair use isn’t a checklist of equally weighted

factors§ 10:9.50 Preliminary injunctions and fair use as an

affirmative defense§ 10:10 De minimis uses

IV. PREAMBLE TO SECTION 107§ 10:11 Generally§ 10:12 Preamble lists only illustrative uses

V. FIRST FAIR USE FACTOR: PURPOSE ANDCHARACTER OF USE

A. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS§ 10:13 Transformative use

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 10:14 Commercial uses§ 10:15 —Legislative history of section 107(1)§ 10:16 —Commerciality not absolute principle§ 10:16.50 Many uses have a mixed character§ 10:17 Noncommercial uses§ 10:18 —Legislative history of nonprofit educational

purposes§ 10:19 —Campbell’s treatment of noncommercial

uses§ 10:20 Entertainment uses§ 10:21 Transformative or productive uses§ 10:21.50 No requirement of changing the original§ 10:22 First factor and law and economics

B. SPECIFIC TYPES OF USES§ 10:23 Specific types of uses—General

considerations§ 10:24 Abstracting and indexing§ 10:25 —Wainwright Securities v. Wall Street

Transcript Corp.§ 10:26 —New York Times v. Roxbury Data Interface§ 10:27 —Nihon Keizai Shimbun v. Comline

Business Data§ 10:27.50 Internet search engines§ 10:28 Advertisements§ 10:29 —Advertisements that sell products§ 10:29.10 —Online Sales§ 10:30 —Comparative advertising§ 10:31 —Advertising parodies§ 10:32 — —Tin Pan Apple v. Miller Brewing and

Eveready Battery v. Adolph Coors§ 10:33 — —Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures§ 10:34 — —MGM v. American Honda Motor§ 10:35 — —MasterCard International v. Nader

2000 Primary Committee§ 10:35.10 —Previews—U.S. v. American Soc. of

Composers, Authors and Publishers§ 10:35.20 Appropriation art§ 10:35.50 Architectural plans: completing the

structure§ 10:36 Biographies§ 10:37 —Toksvig v. Bruce Publishing§ 10:38 —Eisenschiml v. Fawcett Publications§ 10:39 —Greenbie v. Noble§ 10:40 —Holdredge v. Knight Publishing

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxviii

§ 10:41 —Rosemont Enterprises v. Random House§ 10:42 —Estate of Hemingway v. Random House,

Inc.§ 10:43 —Meeropol v. Nizer§ 10:44 —Rokeach v. Avco Embassy Pictures§ 10:45 —Iowa State University Research

Foundation v. American Broadcasting Cos.§ 10:46 —Salinger v. Random House, Inc.§ 10:47 —New Era Publications International ApS

v. Henry Holt & Co.§ 10:48 —Wright v. Warner Books§ 10:49 —Norse v. Henry Holt & Co.§ 10:50 —Nash v. CBS§ 10:51 —Elvis Presley Enterprises v. Passport Video§ 10:52 Blind persons§ 10:53 Broadcasting and other forms of exhibition§ 10:54 —Commercial broadcasts§ 10:55 —Noncommercial broadcasts§ 10:56 Calligraphers§ 10:57 Computers§ 10:58 —Reverse engineering§ 10:59 —Copying to extract data§ 10:60 —Internet uses§ 10:61 Criticism and comment§ 10:62 —Maxtone-Graham v. Burtchaell§ 10:63 —Baraban v. Time Warner§ 10:64 —Arica Institute v. Palmer§ 10:65 —Twin Peaks Productions v. Publications

International§ 10:66 —Castle Rock Entertainment v. Carol

Publishing Group§ 10:67 —Ty, Inc. v. Publications International§ 10:68 —Chicago Board of Education v. Substance,

Inc.§ 10:69 Fortuitous and incidental reproduction§ 10:69.50 Historical uses§ 10:70 Incidental, nonfortuitous uses§ 10:71 —Mura v. CBS§ 10:72 —Amsinck v. Columbia Pictures Industries§ 10:72.25 —House of Bryant Publications, LLC v.

A&E Television Network§ 10:72.50 Karaoke§ 10:73 Governmental and litigation§ 10:73.25 Freedom of Information Act requests§ 10:73.40 Insurance claims

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 10:73.50 Homages§ 10:74 News reporting§ 10:75 News clipping services and rebroadcasts—

Pacific & Southern v. Duncan§ 10:76 —Cable News Network v. Video Monitoring

Services of America§ 10:77 —Los Angeles News Service v. Tullo§ 10:78 —Los Angeles News Service v. KCAL-TV

Channel 9§ 10:79 —Los Angeles News Service v. Reuters

Television International§ 10:80 —Los Angeles News Service v. CBS

Broadcasting§ 10:80.10 —Fox News Network v. TVEyes, Inc.§ 10:80.30 —Swatch Group Management Services Ltd.

v. Bloomberg L.P.§ 10:80.70 —Associated Press v. Meltwater U.S.

Holdings, Inc.§ 10:81 Off-air taping—Bruzzone v. Miller Brewing§ 10:82 —Encyclopedia Britannica Educational

Corp. v. Crooks§ 10:83 —Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City

Studios§ 10:84 — —District court§ 10:85 — —Court of Appeals§ 10:86 — —Supreme Court§ 10:87 —The Hopper cases§ 10:88 Parody§ 10:89 —What’s a parody?§ 10:90 —Who decides whether it’s a parody?§ 10:91 —Does the parody have to target the

original?§ 10:92 —May fair use parodies be vulgar or

obscene?§ 10:93 —Must the original be well-known?§ 10:94 —The vehicle is not the message§ 10:95 —Must the parody be funny or disparaging?§ 10:96 —Post-Campbell parody cases§ 10:97 —Parodies of the Barbie doll§ 10:98 —Second fair use factor: separating sheep

from goats§ 10:99 —How much may a parody appropriate?§ 10:100 —Fourth factor: how do you calculate harm

from parodies?§ 10:101 Photocopying—Educational and government

photocopying

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxx

§ 10:102 — —Wihtol v. Crow§ 10:103 — —Williams & Wilkins v. United States§ 10:104 — —Addison-Wesley Publishing v. New York

University§ 10:105 — —Marcus v. Rowley§ 10:106 — —Association of American Medical

Colleges v. Mikaelian§ 10:107 — —Association of American Medical

Colleges v. Cuomo§ 10:108 — —College Entrance Examination Board v.

Cuomo§ 10:109 — —Newport-Mesa Unified School District v.

California§ 10:109.50 — —National Association of Boards of

Pharmacy v. Board of Regents of theUniversity System of Georgia

§ 10:110 —Corporate photocopying—Basic Books v.Gnomon Corp.

§ 10:111 — —Harper & Row v. Tyco Copy Service§ 10:112 — —Harper & Row v. American Cyanamid

Co.§ 10:113 — —Harper & Row v. Squibb Corp.§ 10:114 — —Pfizer§ 10:115 — —Aircraft Technical Publishers v. Cessna

Aircraft Corp.§ 10:116 — —Schuchart & Associates v. Solo Serve

Corp.§ 10:117 —Photocopying by copy centers—Basic

Books v. Kinko’s Graphics Corp.§ 10:118 — —Princeton University Press v. Michigan

Document Services, Inc.§ 10:118.50 — —Blackwell Publishing, Inc. v. Excel

Research Group, LLC§ 10:119 —Industry newsletters and trade journals—

Pasha Publications v. Enmark Gas Corp.§ 10:120 — —Television Digest v. United States

Telephone Association§ 10:121 — —American Geophysical Union v. Texaco§ 10:122 — — —First factor: purpose and character

of use§ 10:123 — — —Second factor: nature of copyrighted

work§ 10:124 — — —Third factor: amount and

substantiality of portion used§ 10:125 — — —Fourth factor: effect of use on

market for or value of copyrighted work

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 10:126 — — —Judge Jacob’s dissent§ 10:127 Political uses§ 10:128 —Keep Thomson Governor Committee v.

Citizens for Gallen Committee§ 10:129 —Chicago Lawyer v. Forty-Sixth Ward

Regular Democratic Organization§ 10:130 —New York Tribune v. Otis & Co.§ 10:131 —NRA v. Handgun Control Federation of

Ohio§ 10:132 —Phoenix Hill Enterprises v. Dickerson§ 10:132.50 —MasterCard International Inc. v. Nader

2000 Primary Committee, Inc.§ 10:132.60 —Fairey v. Associated Press§ 10:132.70 —Hill v. Public Advocate of the United

States§ 10:132.80 Peterman v. Republican National Committee§ 10:133 Religious uses§ 10:134 —Wihtol v. Crow§ 10:135 —Robert Stigwood Group v. O’Reilly§ 10:136 —Worldwide Church of God v. Philadelphia

Church of God§ 10:137 —Penguin Books U.S.A. v. New Christian

Church of Full Endeavor§ 10:137.50 —Society of the Holy Transfiguration

Monastery, Inc. v. Archbishop Gregory ofDenver, Colorado

VI. THE SECOND FAIR USE FACTOR: THENATURE OF THE COPYRIGHTED WORK

§ 10:138 Generally§ 10:139 Unpublished works§ 10:139.30 Published works§ 10:140 Out-of-print works

VII. THE THIRD FAIR USE FACTOR: AMOUNTAND SUBSTANTIALITY OF THE TAKING

§ 10:141 Generally§ 10:142 Third factor and transformative use§ 10:143 Copying entire work§ 10:143.50 The third factor and electronic forms of

copying and distribution§ 10:144 Defining the “work”

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxii

VIII. THE FOURTH FAIR USE FACTOR: THEEFFECT OF THE USE UPON THEPOTENTIAL MARKET FOR OR VALUE OFTHE COPYRIGHTED WORK

§ 10:145 Generally§ 10:146 Problems with Sony§ 10:147 —Sony did not regard fair use as an

affirmative defense§ 10:148 —Sony “presumption”§ 10:149 Harper & Row’s treatment of fourth factor§ 10:150 Type of harm to be weighed§ 10:150.10 Market need not be completely “usurped”§ 10:150.20 Lack of harm does not by itself result in fair

use§ 10:151 Identifying the relevant potential market for

the copyrighted work§ 10:152 Circularity argument against licensing as

market harm§ 10:153 How much harm is too much?§ 10:154 Widespread harm from small uses§ 10:155 What if the use impacts favorably on

market?

IX. OTHER FAIR USE CONSIDERATIONS§ 10:156 Additional factors, including good faith§ 10:157 Aggregate assessment: actual fair use

analysis§ 10:157.20 Media neutrality and fair use

X. LITIGATION ISSUES§ 10:157.50 Pleading§ 10:158 Third-party claims§ 10:159 Summary judgment, Rule 12(b)(6), Rule

12(c), and Rule 50 motions§ 10:160 Appellate review: applying proper standard

Appendix A. Statutory Evolution of Section 107

Appendix B. Legislative Reports on Fair Use

Appendix C. Statutory Evolution of Sections 108(f)(2)and (4)

Appendix D. Legislative Reports on Sections 108(f)(2)and (4)

Appendix E. Statutory Evolution of Section 118(f)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

Appendix F. Legislative Reports on Section 118(f)

Appendix G. Statutory Evolution of Sections 504(c)(2)(i)and (ii)

Appendix H. Legislative Reports on Sections 504(c)(2)(i)and (ii)

Appendix I. Visual Artists’ Rights Act of 1990

Appendix J. Legislative Report on Visual Artists’ RightsAct of 1990

Appendix K. Fair Use of Unpublished Works

Appendix L. Legislative Reports on Fair Use ofUnpublished Works

CHAPTER 10A. MISUSE§ 10A:1 Generally

CHAPTER 11. FURTHER EXCEPTIONSTO THE REPRODUCTION RIGHT§ 11:1 Introduction§ 11:2 Library photocopying: section 108§ 11:3 —Relationship between sections 107 and 108§ 11:4 —Reports of Register of Copyrights on section

108—1983 report§ 11:5 — —1988 report§ 11:6 —Digital Millennium Copyright Act§ 11:7 —Case law under section 108§ 11:8 Section 112: ephemeral-recording exemption§ 11:8.50 —The Section 108 Study Group Report§ 11:9 —1976 Act§ 11:10 —1998 DMCA amendment§ 11:11 Limitations on pictorial, graphic, and

sculptural works embodied in useful articles§ 11:12 —Case law under section 1(b) of the 1909 Act§ 11:13 —Legislative history of section 113 of 1976

Act§ 11:14 —Section 113 and architectural plans and

works§ 11:15 —Section 113(c)§ 11:16 Section 114(b): sound recordings§ 11:17 —Infringement of sound recordings§ 11:18 —Agee v. Paramount Communications§ 11:19 —Public broadcasting exemption§ 11:20 License for making and distributing

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxiv

phonorecords of nondramatic musicalworks—1909 Act

§ 11:21 —1976 Act§ 11:22 —Operation of section 115 license—What

types of works are covered?§ 11:23 — —What types of recordings are covered?§ 11:24 — —Purpose of new recording and who is

entitled to license§ 11:24.50 Ringtones§ 11:25 License for making and distributing

phonorecords of nondramatic musicalworks—Operation of section 115 license—Procedure for obtaining compulsory license

§ 11:26 — —Nontransferability of section 115 licenses§ 11:27 — —Digital Performance Right in Sound

Recordings Act of 1995§ 11:28 — —Case law under section 115§ 11:29 Section 117: exemption for making of backup

copies and adaptations of computerprograms

§ 11:30 —CONTU report§ 11:31 Section 117: structure of section 117§ 11:32 Section 117: “owner” of copy§ 11:33 Section 117: business agreements§ 11:34 Section 117: consumer agreements§ 11:35 Section 117: essential step in conjunction

with machine§ 11:36 Section 117: input as making of copy§ 11:37 Section 117: essential-step requirement§ 11:38 Section 117: essential step in conjunction

with machine—“In no other manner”§ 11:39 Section 117: “a machine”§ 11:40 Section 117—“A copy”§ 11:41 —Right to make backup copies§ 11:42 —Adaptation right§ 11:43 Section 117(b): transfers of copies made

under section 117§ 11:44 Section 117(c): computer maintenance or

repair§ 11:45 Section 118: public broadcasting compulsory

license§ 11:46 Section 120(a): architectural works§ 11:47 Audio Home Recording Act of 1992§ 11:48 Digital Performance Right in Sound

Recordings Act of 1995§ 11:49 Section 121: reproduction for the blind

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

CHAPTER 12. DERIVATIVE WORKS§ 12:1 Section 106(2): the right to prepare derivative

works based on the copyrighted work§ 12:2 Statutory language§ 12:3 Evolution of the derivative right—Early case

law§ 12:4 —The 1802 Act§ 12:5 —The 1856 Act§ 12:6 —The 1870 Act§ 12:7 —The 1909 Act§ 12:8 The 1976 Act§ 12:8.50 Registration with derivative works§ 12:9 Examples of derivative works§ 12:10 —Additions, substitutions, and deletions§ 12:11 —Photographs are not derivative works of

the object depicted in the photography§ 12:12 The scope of the 1976 Act derivative right—

When is a work an infringing “derivative”work?

§ 12:13 —An infringing derivative work must besubstantially similar

§ 12:14 —Infringing derivative works need not befixed

§ 12:14.50 Confusion over a protectible derivative workand infringement of the right to preparederivative works

§ 12:15 The scope of the 1976 Act derivative right—An infringing derivative work need notinvolve a reproduction

§ 12:16 —An infringing derivative work must changethe authorship of the original

§ 12:16.10 Is a derivative work of an infringingderivative work also infringing?

§ 12:17 The scope of the 1976 Act derivative right—Internet issues: framing, inline linking, andpop-ups

§ 12:18 — —Framing/in line linking§ 12:19 — —Pop-up advertisements§ 12:20 —Three-dimensional versions of two-

dimensional works§ 12:21 Relationship of the derivative work to the

original work§ 12:22 Does the copyright owner possess rights in an

infringing derivative work?§ 12:23 Joint authors and derivative works§ 12:24 Exceptions to the derivative right

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxvi

§ 12:25 —Section 107: fair use§ 12:26 —Section 112(e): ephemeral recordings§ 12:27 —Section 114(b): sound recordings§ 12:28 —Section 115(a)(2): compulsory license for

making and distributing phonorecords ofnondramatic musical works

§ 12:29 —Section 117: computer programs§ 12:30 —Section 118(f): compulsory license for public

broadcasting stations§ 12:31 —Section 120(b): architectural works

CHAPTER 13. SECTION 106(3): THERIGHT TO DISTRIBUTE COPIES OF THEWORK

I. INTRODUCTION§ 13:1 Statutory language§ 13:2 Grant of right, generally

II. OVERVIEW OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS§ 13:3 Renaissance and Elizabethan privileges§ 13:4 The English Statute of Anne§ 13:5 The pre-1790 state statutes§ 13:6 The pre-1976 Act federal statutes—The 1790

Act§ 13:6.50 The 1891 International Copyright Act§ 13:7 The pre-1976 Act federal statutes—The 1909

Act§ 13:8 The 1976 Act

III. DISTRIBUTION RIGHTS: NATURE, TYPES,AND DISTINCTIONS

§ 13:9 Nature of the distribution right, generally§ 13:10 What constitutes a distribution to “the

public”?§ 13:11 Digital “distributions”§ 13:11.50 The right to “make available”§ 13:12 Distribution and performance rights

distinguished

IV. EXCEPTIONS TO THE DISTRIBUTIONRIGHT

§ 13:13 Section 107: fair use

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 13:14 Section 108: reproductions by libraries andarchives

§ 13:15 Section 109: the first sale/exhaustiondoctrine—Statutory provision

§ 13:16 —The existence of an authorized first sale isan affirmative defense

§ 13:17 —First sale is not dependent on the copyrightowner receiving a “just reward” for the copy

§ 13:18 —Judicial origins of the first sale doctrine§ 13:19 —Codification of the Bobbs-Merrill in the

1909 Act§ 13:20 The 1976 Act—Statutory History§ 13:21 —Passage in 1976§ 13:22 —“Lawfully made under this title”§ 13:22.50 Place of sale is not relevant§ 13:23 The 1976 Act—The first sale doctrine and

digital distributions§ 13:24 —Contractual restrictions: section 109(d)§ 13:25 —Computer programs

V. RENTAL RIGHTS§ 13:26 The 1984 Record Rental Act§ 13:27 The 1988 Record Rental amendments§ 13:28 The 1990 Computer Software amendments§ 13:29 —Exemptions from the computer program rental

ban—Computer programs within machines orproducts

§ 13:30 — —The Nintendo exemption§ 13:31 — —Semiconductor chips and mask works§ 13:32 —The 1994 GATT-TRIPS agreement

VI. SECTION 115: COMPULSORY LICENSEFOR MAKING AND DISTRIBUTINGPHONORECORDS

§ 13:33 Overview

VII. SECTION 602: THE RIGHT OFIMPORTATION

§ 13:34 Introduction§ 13:35 Premodern problems on the continent§ 13:36 England§ 13:36.50 Exhaustion of the distribution right§ 13:37 Berne Convention and the WIPO treaties

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxviii

§ 13:37.50 GATT/TRIPs and the problem ofinternational exhaustion

§ 13:38 Modern European Union Law§ 13:39 U.S. law—Statutory provision: section 602§ 13:40 —Pre-1909 Act law§ 13:41 —The 1909 Act§ 13:42 —The 1976 Act§ 13:43 — —Who is an “importer”?§ 13:44 — —The proper construction of section 109(a)

and section 602(a)(1)§ 13:44.10 The confusion over extraterritoriality§ 13:45 The distribution must be within the United

States§ 13:46 The exportation right§ 13:47 U.S. law—The 1976 Act—Section 603

VIII. OTHER PROVISIONS§ 13:48 Section 113§ 13:49 Section 114§ 13:50 Section 115§ 13:51 Section 117§ 13:52 Section 118§ 13:53 Section 120§ 13:54 Section 512: limitations on liability for online

service providers

CHAPTER 14. THE RIGHT TOPUBLICLY PERFORM THE WORK

I. GENERALLY§ 14:1 Statutory language§ 14:2 Introduction

II. HISTORY OF PUBLIC PERFORMANCERIGHT

§ 14:3 1790–1909§ 14:4 The 1909 Act§ 14:5 —The courts’ interpretation of the 1909 Act§ 14:6 —Performance§ 14:7 —Reasoning by analogy§ 14:8 —Public performances§ 14:9 —For-profit performances§ 14:10 The 1952 Act

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 14:11 The 1976 Copyright Act—The Register ofCopyrights’ 1961 report

§ 14:12 —The 1963 Copyright Office Preliminary DraftBill

§ 14:13 —The 1964 revision bills§ 14:14 —The 1965 revision bills§ 14:15 —The 1965 Congressional Hearings§ 14:16 —The 1966 House Judiciary Committee Bill§ 14:17 —The 1966 and 1973 Senate hearings§ 14:18 —The 1975 House hearings§ 14:19 Construction of the 1976 Act’s public

performance right§ 14:20 —No for-profit limitation§ 14:21 —Distribution and performance rights

distinguished§ 14:22 —To perform§ 14:23 —To transmit a performance§ 14:24 —To perform a work publicly§ 14:25 — —Legislative history of “to perform a work

publicly”§ 14:26 —Places open to the public§ 14:27 —Places open to family and social acquaintances§ 14:28 —To perform a work publicly—Transmissions

III. SOUND RECORDINGS: SECTION 106(6)§ 14:29 Generally

IV. LIMITATIONS ON THE PERFORMANCERIGHT

§ 14:30 Generally§ 14:31 Section 107: fair use§ 14:32 Section 109: exhaustion doctrine§ 14:33 Section 110: instruction and other nonprofit

performances§ 14:34 —Section 110(1): face-to-face instruction§ 14:35 —Section 110(2): educational broadcasting§ 14:36 Section 110—Section 110(3): religious

performances§ 14:37 —Section 110(4): nonprofit performances§ 14:38 —Section 110(5): small-business exemption§ 14:39 Section 110: instruction and other nonprofit

performances—Section 110(5) of the 1976Act

§ 14:40 —Section 110(5) exemption is for “small”businesses only

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxx

§ 14:41 Section 110—Section 110(5)—“Further”transmissions

§ 14:42 — —The Cass County test§ 14:43 — —An apparatus “commonly used in private

homes”§ 14:44 — —The 1998 amendments§ 14:45 — —The WTO panel ruling§ 14:46 —Section 110(6): agricultural and

horticultural fairs§ 14:47 —Section 110(7): record-store exemption§ 14:48 —Sections 110(8) and (9): performances of

literary works for the blind and otherhandicapped individuals

§ 14:49 —Section 110(10): nonprofit veterans andfraternal organizations

§ 14:50 Section 111: cable television and othersecondary transmissions

§ 14:51 —A brief history of section 111—The pre-1966era

§ 14:52 —The 1966 freeze§ 14:53 —A brief history of section 111—The 1966

and 1967 copyright revision bills§ 14:54 —The Fortnightly decision§ 14:55 —1969-1971§ 14:56 —1972-1973§ 14:57 —The Teleprompter decision§ 14:58 —1974§ 14:59 —Passage of the Act§ 14:60 —Operation of section 111§ 14:61 —Primary and secondary transmissions§ 14:62 —Local service area of a primary transmitter§ 14:63 —Network station§ 14:64 —Distant signal equivalents§ 14:65 —“Cable systems”: wireless included§ 14:66 —Section 111(a)§ 14:67 —Section 111(a)(1): hotel relaying§ 14:68 —Section 111(a)(2): instructional secondary

transmissions§ 14:69 —Section 111(a)(3): passive carriers§ 14:70 —Section 111(a)(4): retransmission by

satellite carriers for private home viewingby earth stations

§ 14:71 —Section 111(a)(5): noncable secondarytransmissions by governmental bodies andnonprofit organizations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 14:72 —Section 111(b): secondary transmissions tocontrolled groups

§ 14:73 —Section 111(c): conditions for andlimitations on the cable compulsory license

§ 14:74 —Section 111(d)(1): compulsory license fees—What fees are paid on

§ 14:75 —Section 111(d)(1)(B) and (D): three cable“forms” and their rates

§ 14:76 —Section 111(d)(2) to (4): distribution of thecompulsory license fees

§ 14:77 —Sections 111(d)(2) to (4): distribution of thecompulsory license fees—Phase I

§ 14:78 — —Phase II§ 14:79 —Section 111(e): nonsimultaneous cable

secondary transmissions§ 14:79.50 —Internet streaming of television

programming§ 14:80 —Retransmission consent

V. SECTION 114: SOUND RECORDINGS§ 14:81 Generally§ 14:82 The section 106(6) right and its limitations in

section 114§ 14:83 —Section 114(a)§ 14:84 —Section 114(b)§ 14:85 —Section 114(c)§ 14:86 Exemptions and compulsory licenses: section

114(d)§ 14:87 Exemptions—Radio retransmissions§ 14:88 —Radio retransmissions: Bonneville v.

Peters—DMCA amendments§ 14:89 —Retransmissions: section 114(d)(1)(b)§ 14:89.50 Webcasting rates§ 14:90 Exemptions—Incidental feeds: section

114(d)(1)(c)§ 14:91 Compulsory licensing: section 114(d)(2)§ 14:92 —“Interactive” services§ 14:93 — —Sound recording performance

complement§ 14:94 —Other types of services entitled to the

compulsory license§ 14:95 Section 114(d)(3): licenses for interactive

service§ 14:96 Section 114(e): antitrust exemption§ 14:97 Section 114(f): procedures for compulsory

licensing

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxxii

§ 14:98 Compulsory license rates

VI. SECTION 116: THE JUKEBOXCOMPULSORY LICENSE

§ 14:99 Generally§ 14:100 The 1909 Act§ 14:101 The 1976 Act: background§ 14:102 —The operation of the jukebox compulsory

license under the 1976 Act§ 14:103 —The Berne Convention Implementation Act of

1988§ 14:104 Section 118: compulsory license for public

broadcasting§ 14:105 Section 119: secondary transmissions of

superstations and network stations bysatellite carriers to the public for privatehome viewing

§ 14:106 —Evolution of the provision§ 14:107 —The beneficiary of the license: satellite

carriers§ 14:108 —Status of direct broadcast satellites§ 14:109 —The role of distributors§ 14:110 —Covered transmissions§ 14:111 —Definitions of “superstation” and “network

station”§ 14:112 —Unserved household limitation§ 14:113 —Section 119(e): grandfathering certain

terminated services§ 14:114 —Section 119(d)(11): commercial

establishments, recreational vehicles, andtrucks

§ 14:115 —Section 119(a)(2)(B)(iii): C-band grandfatherclause

§ 14:116 —Determination of unserved household status§ 14:117 — —Burden of proof regarding status as an

unserved household§ 14:118 —Compulsory license fees§ 14:119 — —1999 reduction in rates§ 14:120 — —The 2004 negotiated rate§ 14:121 —Violations of territorial restrictions: section

119(a)(5)

VII. SECTION 122: SATELLITERETRANSMISSION OF “LOCAL TOLOCAL” STATION EXEMPTION

§ 14:122 Generally

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

VIII. SECTION 512: LIMITATIONS ONLIABILITY FOR ONLINE SERVICEPROVIDERS

§ 14:123 Generally

Volume 5

CHAPTER 15. THE RIGHT TO DISPLAYPUBLICLY THE WORK§ 15:1 Statutory language§ 15:2 Legislative history of section 106(5)§ 15:3 Construction of the public display right§ 15:4 Infringement of the display right§ 15:5 —Case law—Traditional public display cases§ 15:6 — —Online displays§ 15:7 — —Linking and framing§ 15:8 Limitations on the public display right—Section

107: fair use§ 15:9 —Section 107: fair use§ 15:10 —Section 109: the exhaustion doctrine§ 15:11 —Section 110: instructional displays§ 15:12 —Section 111: secondary transmissions§ 15:13 —Section 113: display of pictorial, graphic, and

sculptural works embodied in useful articles§ 15:14 —Section 118: display by public broadcasting

stations§ 15:15 —Section 119: secondary transmissions of

superstations and network signals by satellitecarrier or private viewing via earth stations

§ 15:16 —Section 120: two-dimensional reproductions ofarchitectural works

§ 15:17 —Section 122: satellite retransmission of localsignals

§ 15:18 —Section 512: exemption for online serviceproviders

CHAPTER 16. THE VISUAL ARTISTSRIGHTS ACT OF 1990§ 16:1 Passage of the Act§ 16:2 Rationale for droit moral§ 16:3 Berne adherence and droit moral§ 16:4 Persons who may claim benefits of VARA—

Individual artists

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxxiv

§ 16:5 —Foreign authors§ 16:6 —Joint authors§ 16:7 Protected subject matter§ 16:8 —Ensemble works§ 16:9 —Still photographic images produced for

exhibition purposes only§ 16:10 VARA as a preservation statute§ 16:11 No violation for reproductions§ 16:12 Exclusions from protected subject matter§ 16:13 —Work for hire§ 16:13.50 Advertising and promotional use§ 16:14 Formalities—Numbering and marking

requirement§ 16:15 —Registration§ 16:16 Rights granted§ 16:17 —Right of attribution§ 16:18 —Right of integrity§ 16:19 — —Intent§ 16:20 — —Distortion, mutilation, or other

modification§ 16:21 — —Potential harm to artist’s honor or

reputation§ 16:22 — —Intentional distortion, mutilation, or

other modification§ 16:23 — —Lack of right to prohibit display of

mutilated work§ 16:24 — —Right to prohibit destruction§ 16:25 — —Recognized stature§ 16:26 —Defining “copy” of work for destruction

purposes§ 16:27 —No section 106A right to finish work of

visual art§ 16:28 Exceptions to rights§ 16:29 —Passage of time§ 16:30 —Public presentation and conservation§ 16:31 —Site-specific works§ 16:32 Works of visual art contained in buildings§ 16:33 —Section 113(d)(1)§ 16:34 —Section 113(d)(2)§ 16:35 Fair use§ 16:36 First Amendment§ 16:37 Waiver of rights§ 16:38 Duration and preemption—Duration§ 16:39 —Preemption and preexisting causes of

action

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 16:40 —Preemption during artist’s life§ 16:41 —Subject-matter preemption§ 16:42 —Equivalent rights preemption§ 16:43 —Equivalent remedies§ 16:44 —Preemption of VARA by virtue of section

106 rights§ 16:45 —Subject-matter preemption§ 16:46 Remedies and injunctive relief§ 16:47 Effective date and retroactive application§ 16:48 Sovereign immunity

CHAPTER 16A. TECHNOLOGICALPROTECTION MEASURES ANDCOPYRIGHT RIGHTS MANAGEMENTINFORMATION§ 16A:1 Introduction§ 16A:2 What is a technological measure that

effectively controls access to a workprotected under this title?

§ 16A:3 The OEM Cases§ 16A:3.50 Copyright management information—

Statutory provision§ 16A:3.60 —Works in non-digital form§ 16A:4 The knowledge requirement§ 16A:4.50 Nexus to infringement§ 16A:5 Civil remedies

Appendix A. Statement of the Librarian of CongressRelating to Section 1201 Rulemaking

CHAPTER 17. JURISDICTION, VENUE,AND FORUM NON CONVENIENS

I. INTRODUCTION§ 17:1 Generally§ 17:2 Hypothetical jurisdiction§ 17:3 Hierarchy of jurisdictional analysis

II. SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION§ 17:4 The nature of subject-matter jurisdiction§ 17:5 Origins and history§ 17:6 “Arising under” jurisdiction—Well-pleaded

complaint rule and the America Invents Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxxvi

§ 17:7 —Determining when arising-under jurisdictionexists

§ 17:8 — —Osborn v. Bank of the United States§ 17:9 — —The early patent cases§ 17:10 — —Shulthis v. McDouglas§ 17:11 — —American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler

Co.§ 17:12 — —The decision in American Well Works§ 17:13 — —Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co.§ 17:14 — —Moore v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.§ 17:15 — —Gully v. First National Bank in Meridian§ 17:16 — —Franchise Tax Board v. Construction

Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California§ 17:17 — —Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., v.

Thompson§ 17:18 — —Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating

Corp.§ 17:19 — —Holmes Group, Inc., v. Vornado Air

Circulation§ 17:20 — —Jones v. R.R. Donnelly & Sons Co.§ 17:21 — —Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc., v.

Darue Engineering & Manufacturing and Gunnv. Minton

III. REMOVAL AND FEDERAL QUESTIONJURISDICTION

§ 17:22 Generally§ 17:23 Copyright, “complete preemption,” and removal§ 17:24 The Catch-22: removal and § 411(a)§ 17:25 Dismissal of a properly removed case where

counterclaim arising under the copyright ispled

§ 17:26 Facial v. factual attacks on subject-matterjurisdiction and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (6)

§ 17:27 —Hagans v. Lavine and constitutionalsubstantiality

§ 17:28 A proposed classification for subject-matterclaims

IV. ARISING UNDER JURISDICTION AND THECOPYRIGHT ACT

§ 17:29 Generally§ 17:30 T.B. Harms: a flawed landmark§ 17:31 —The dispute

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 17:32 —On appeal§ 17:33 —Problems with the language§ 17:34 —Conclusion§ 17:35 Bassett’s rejection of the “essence” or

“primary and controlling” test§ 17:36 “Arising under” jurisdiction and the logic of

class or set theory§ 17:37 Category I claims: American Well Works§ 17:38 Category II claims: Smith§ 17:39 Rooker-Feldman: no res judicata for

erroneous state court proceedings§ 17:39.10 Res judicata and foreign judgments§ 17:40 Election: contract or copyright infringement§ 17:41 Paradoxical intersection of contract,

copyright, and subject-matter jurisdiction§ 17:42 A reverse Smith approach§ 17:43 Condition to the license or independent

covenant?§ 17:44 Procedure after subject-matter jurisdiction is

initially established§ 17:45 Subject-matter jurisdiction is a question of

law, reviewed de novo§ 17:46 Suits against the United States and its

contractors§ 17:47 Lack of standing is also lack of subject-

matter jurisdiction§ 17:48 No subject-matter jurisdiction for

extraterritorial acts

V. DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS AND ARTICLEIII’S CASE OR CONTROVERSYREQUIREMENT

§ 17:49 Generally§ 17:49.50 Declaratory judgments and Section 411(a)§ 17:50 Discretionary nature of declaratory

judgments and the first-to-file rule

VI. STATE COURT JURISDICTION§ 17:51 Green v. Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.

VII. PENDENT AND ANCILLARY ISSUES§ 17:52 Generally§ 17:53 Supplemental jurisdiction§ 17:54 —Gibbs and relatedness

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

lxxxviii

§ 17:54.50 Review of supplemental jurisdiction rulings§ 17:55 Pendent foreign claims: 28 U.S.C.A.

§ 1367(c)(3)§ 17:56 Pendent party jurisdiction: Finley and its

reversal by Congress

VIII. STAY OF COPYRIGHT CLAIMS PENDINGOUTCOME OF STATE OR FOREIGNLITIGATION: COLORADO RIVERDEFERENCE

§ 17:57 State litigation§ 17:57.50 Stay pending tribal decision§ 17:58 Foreign litigation§ 17:59 Deferral and arbitration

IX. SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION ANDTHE PRIMA FACIE CASE OF COPYRIGHTINFRINGEMENT

§ 17:60 Generally§ 17:61 A protected work of authorship§ 17:62 Ownership of the right sued upon§ 17:63 Unauthorized exercise of one of the

exclusive rights in a work§ 17:64 Compliance with statutory formalities:

registration, an essential part of the U.S.copyright law from its inception

§ 17:64.10 The registration requirement from1710–1909

§ 17:64.20 The preconstitutional state statutes§ 17:64.30 The 1790 Federal Copyright Act§ 17:64.40 The 1909 Act§ 17:64.50 The legislative history of the 1976 Act§§ 17:65 to 17:76 [Deleted]§ 17:77 Registration before filing suit: Section 411(a)§ 17:78 —Requirement of actual registration or

rejection§ 17:79 Registration before filing suit: section

411(a)—The Berne ConventionImplementation Act

§ 17:80 Registration before filing suit: Section411(a)—The Copyright Reform Act of 1993

§ 17:81 —Preregistration§ 17:82 —No “legal limbo” or “unfairness” by

enforcing Section 411(a)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

lxxxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 17:82.50 —Defendant’s “bad acts” don’t excusecompliance with 411(a)

§ 17:83 Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation v.Wall-Street.com, LLC—Analysis anddiscussion

§ 17:83.50 Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick and theSupreme Court’s recent jurisdictionjurisprudence

§ 17:83.60 Opinions after Reed-Elsevier§ 17:84 When plaintiff subsequently obtains a

certificate of registration§ 17:85 When plaintiff’s registration is cancelled

after suit is filed§ 17:86 Section 411(b): works consisting of sounds

and images§ 17:87 Failure to provide a correct deposit§ 17:88 The special case of derivative works§ 17:89 Backwards-looking registrations§ 17:90 Forwards-looking registrations§ 17:91 The special case of collective works§ 17:91.50 Notification of register of filing of an

infringement action§ 17:92 Group registrations: Section 408(c)§ 17:93 “Single work” registrations: Section 408(a)§ 17:93.50 Multiple classes§ 17:94 Attachment of copy of certificate of

registration or pleading registrationnumber

§ 17:95 Refusals to register: effect of and standardfor review, availability of mandamus, andAPA review

§ 17:96 When refusal occurs§ 17:97 Appeals within the Copyright Office from a

refusal to register a claim§ 17:98 Standard of deference due Copyright Office

actions—The Supreme Court trilogy ofdeference opinions

§ 17:99 — —Chevron§ 17:100 — —Skidmore§ 17:101 — —Mead§ 17:102 —General issues of deference to the

Copyright Office§ 17:103 —Deference to registration determinations§ 17:104 — —Separability cases§ 17:105 Standard of deference due copyright office

actions—Deference to registration

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xc

determinations—No requirement that theoffice explain its decision to register a work

§ 17:106 —Deference to scope determinations§ 17:107 An action to declare a registration invalid§ 17:108 An action to cancel a registration§ 17:109 Section 410(c) prima facie evidentiary status

to the validity of the copyright and of thefacts stated in the certificate

§ 17:110 —Validity of the copyright and scope of theregistration

§ 17:111 —Validity of the facts§ 17:112 —The special case of disclosure of derivative

works and compilations§ 17:113 —No prima facie status for facts not stated

in the certificate or for false facts§ 17:114 Prima facie status of renewal certificates§ 17:115 —Under the 1909 Act§ 17:116 —The 1976 Act§ 17:117 —The 1992 Automatic Renewal Act§ 17:118 —Case law after passage of the 1992 Act§ 17:119 Section 410(c) and the scope of the

registration§ 17:120 Competing registrations§ 17:121 Errors in registrations: fraud on the

copyright office, unclean hands, and misuse§ 17:122 —The purpose of the registration system is

to create an accurate public record§ 17:123 —Types of errors—Immaterial errors§ 17:124 — —Material errors§ 17:124.50 Compliance with Registration requirements

may be presented to a jury§ 17:125 Errors in registrations: fraud on the

copyright office, unclean hands, andmisuse—The effect of immaterial andmaterial errors

§ 17:125.50 Section 411(b)(2): Obtaining the advice ofthe Register of Copyrights

§ 17:126 Fraud on the Copyright Office§ 17:127 Unclean hands§ 17:128 Misuse§ 17:129 Rule-of-doubt registrations§ 17:130 —The 1983 notice of inquiry: rule of doubt

for computer programs§ 17:131 —Operation of the rule of doubt§ 17:132 Supplementary registration

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xciK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 17:132.50 Disclosure of trade secrets by filing with theCopyright Office

§ 17:132.60 Patent bar under 35 U.S.C.A. § 1102(b) dueto registration with the Copyright Office

X. PERSONAL JURISDICTION§ 17:133 Generally§ 17:133.50 Personal jurisdiction is not based on

plaintiff’s location§ 17:133.75 Registering a claim with the Copyright

Office§ 17:134 Procedural and evidentiary issues§ 17:135 —Facial challenges§ 17:136 —Factual challenges§ 17:137 Jurisdiction must be established for each

claim§ 17:138 Jurisdiction must be established for each

defendant, including parents andsubsidiaries

§ 17:139 Elements and overview of personaljurisdiction

§ 17:140 Service of process: Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(1) and(h)

§ 17:141 Foreign defendants: Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2)§ 17:142 Consent or waiver§ 17:143 Exercise of jurisdiction over nonresidents—

Pennoyer v. Neff§ 17:144 —World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson§ 17:145 —Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A.

v. Hall: specific and general jurisdictiondefined

§ 17:146 —Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. SuperiorCourt of California and Goodyear DunlopTires Operations, S.A. v. Brown: stream ofcommerce limited

§ 17:146.50 —J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro§ 17:147 Analytical framework§ 17:148 General jurisdiction§ 17:149 —“Doing business”§ 17:150 —In copyright cases§ 17:151 Specific jurisdiction§ 17:152 —Relatedness/Nexus§ 17:153 —The Ninth Circuit’s “but for” test§ 17:154 —Purposeful availment§ 17:155 — —Distinguished from purposeful direction

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xcii

§ 17:156 —Express aiming after the Supreme Court’sopinion in Walden v. Fiore

§ 17:157 —“Transacting business”§ 17:158 —Specific jurisdiction copyright cases—Situs

of the infringement§ 17:159 — —Situs as the forum§ 17:160 — —Intentional infringement§ 17:161 — —Calder v. Jones: international torts and

the “effects” test for specific jurisdiction§ 17:162 — —The Ninth Circuit and Calder—

Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc.§ 17:163 — — —Panavision International L.P. v.

Toeppen§ 17:164 — — —Bancroft & Masters, Inc. v. Augusta

National, Inc.§ 17:165 — — —Dole Food Co. Inc. v. Watts§ 17:166 — — —Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le

Racisme et L’Antisemitisme§ 17:166.50 —Specific jurisdiction in copyright cases—

Washington Shoe Co. v. A-Z SportingGoods Inc.

§ 17:167 —Specific jurisdiction copyright cases—Copyright is not an intentional tort

§ 17:168 — —Calder and harm in the forum§ 17:169 — —Calder and copyright: Janmark§ 17:170 — —Calder and effects on an industry§ 17:171 — —Pavlovich§ 17:172 — —Grokster§ 17:173 Examples of specific jurisdiction in copyright

cases§ 17:174 Stream of commerce as a basis for specific

jurisdiction§ 17:175 Recurring problems—Advertising§ 17:176 —Cease-and-desist letters§ 17:177 —Contracts§ 17:178 —Filing with the copyright office§ 17:179 —Forum-selection clauses and personal

jurisdiction§ 17:180 —Licensing§ 17:181 —Performing rights societies and

mechanical licenses—Performing rightssocieties

§ 17:182 — —Mechanical licenses§ 17:183 —Piercing the corporate veil§ 17:184 —Trade shows and conferences

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xciiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 17:185 The Internet and personal jurisdiction,generally

§ 17:186 The Internet and personal jurisdiction—Zippo Manufacturing and specificjurisdiction

§ 17:186.50 Broadcast transmissions§ 17:187 The Internet and personal jurisdiction—

E-mail transmissions§ 17:188 —eBay and Internet auctions§ 17:189 The Internet and general jurisdiction§ 17:190 Pendent personal jurisdiction: an exception

to establishing jurisdiction for each claim§ 17:191 Declaratory judgment actions and personal

jurisdiction§ 17:192 —Ham and general jurisdiction§ 17:193 —Ham and specific jurisdiction

XI. ARBITRATION§ 17:194 Generally§ 17:195 Motions to compel arbitration§ 17:196 Remedies available in arbitration

XII. INTERPLEADER§ 17:197 In general

XIII. VENUE§ 17:198 Overview§ 17:199 The nature of venue§ 17:200 Section 1400(a)§ 17:201 Pendent venue§ 17:202 Federal–state pendent venue§ 17:203 Federal claim proper under special venue

statute but not under general venue statute§ 17:204 Federal claim proper under general venue

statute but not under special venue statute§ 17:205 Establishing venue§ 17:206 Venue and forum-selection clauses§ 17:207 Improper venue: section 1406(a)§ 17:208 Transfer of venue: Section 1404(a)

XIV. FORUM NON CONVENIENS§ 17:209 Overview§ 17:210 The dual rationales for forum non

conveniens

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xciv

§ 17:211 Scottish roots§ 17:212 The English experience§ 17:213 Forum non conveniens in the United States;

overview§ 17:214 The forum non conveniens analysis§ 17:215 When forum non conveniens applies in

copyright cases§ 17:216 When an alternate forum exists§ 17:217 —The Gilbert factors§ 17:218 —Private factors§ 17:219 — —Hometown advantage§ 17:220 Public factors§ 17:221 Forum non conveniens and federal question

jurisdiction§ 17:222 Forum non conveniens in copyright cases§ 17:222.50 Partial dismissals§ 17:223 Conditional dismissals

Volume 6

CHAPTER 18. PREEMPTION OF OTHERLAWS

I. STATUTORY PROVISION ANDINTERPRETATION

§ 18:1 Introduction§ 18:2 Express preemption in the Copyright Act§ 18:3 Legislative history of section 301—1961 to

1975§ 18:4 —1963 preliminary draft bill§ 18:5 —1964 revision bill§ 18:6 —Register’s 1965 supplementary report and

the 1965 revision bill§ 18:7 —The 1966 amendments§ 18:8 —Passage of the Act§ 18:8.50 Preemption is an affirmative defense§ 18:9 The 1976 Act’s two-step test§ 18:9.50 Erroneous distinction between uses in trade

and expressive works§ 18:10 Subject-matter preemption—Fixation§ 18:11 Simultaneous fixation§ 18:12 Interpretation of Section 301 of the 1976

Act—Subject-matter preemption—Examplesof protected subject matter

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xcvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 18:13 The meaning of “within the subject matter ofcopyright”

§ 18:14 Interpretation of section 301 of the 1976Act—The meaning of “within the subjectmatter of copyright”—Unoriginal works

§ 18:15 — —Unoriginal material in original works:“partial preemption”

§ 18:16 Equivalent rights§ 18:17 —Labels do not count§ 18:18 —“Extra-elements” test: not quite right§ 18:19 —“Qualitatively different-in-kind” test: the

correct approach§ 18:20 —Intent, bad faith, awareness, and

commercial immorality are not different-in-kind elements

§ 18:21 —Damages are not qualitativelydifferent-in-kind

§ 18:21.50 Anti-SLAPP legislation

II. PARTICULAR ACTIONS§ 18:22 Breach of confidence/fiduciary relationship§ 18:22.50 Common law copyright§ 18:23 Conspiracy§ 18:24 Constructive trust§ 18:25 Contracts§ 18:26 —ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, Bowers v.

Baystate Technologies, Inc., and Davidson &Associates v. Jung: The rise of privatecopyright law

§ 18:26.50 —A mere contractual promise not to violate asection 106 right is preempted

§ 18:27 —A promise to pay is not qualitativelydifferent-in-kind

§ 18:28 —Implied and quasi-contracts: the plight ofidea men

§ 18:29 —Material breaches of contract and election§ 18:30 —Tortious interference with contractual

relations or prospective business/economicadvantage

§ 18:31 Right of contribution/indemnification§ 18:32 Right of contribution§ 18:33 Right of indemnification§ 18:34 Conversion§ 18:35 Accounting§ 18:36 Deceptive trade practices

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xcvi

§ 18:37 Fraud§ 18:38 Injury to business reputation§ 18:39 Misappropriation, including “hot” news§ 18:40 —“Hot news”§ 18:41 Negligence and outrage§ 18:42 Quantum meruit§ 18:42.50 Resale royalty state laws§ 18:43 Right of privacy/publicity§ 18:43.10 State criminal actions§ 18:43.50 State VARA actions§ 18:43.90 Trade dress§ 18:44 Trade secrets§ 18:45 Trespass to chattels/Computer Fraud and

Abuse Act§ 18:46 —State trespass to chattel claims§ 18:47 Unfair competition, including passing off and

reverse passing off§ 18:48 —Reverse passing off§ 18:49 —State claims of reverse passing off§ 18:50 —Federal claims of reverse passing off under

section 43(a) of the Lanham Act; the effectof Dastar

§ 18:51 Unjust enrichment§ 18:52 Miscellaneous state statutes§ 18:52.50 Pleading pitfalls§ 18:52.60 Preemption by the DMCA of state law claims

relation to takedown notices

III. SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF SECTION 301§ 18:53 Section 301(b)(4): architectural works§ 18:54 Section 301(c): pre-1972 sound recordings§ 18:55 —Capital Records, Inc. v. Naxos America, Inc.§ 18:56 —Section 301(d): other federal statutes§ 18:57 Section 301(e): adherence to the Berne

Convention§ 18:58 Section 301(f): Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990

IV. SUPREMACY CLAUSE PREEMPTION§ 18:59 Generally§ 18:60 Continued relevance of the Supremacy Clause

CHAPTER 19. PLEADING§ 19:1 Introduction

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xcviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 19:2 Basic pleading requirements in Fed. R. Civ. P.8 and 9

§ 19:2.50 Pleading fraud on the copyright office§ 19:2.60 Pleading unclean hands§ 19:3 Plaintiff§ 19:4 —Registration§ 19:5 —Ownership of a protected work§ 19:6 — —Identification of the work(s) at issue§ 19:7 —Ownership of the relevant exclusive right§ 19:8 Defendant’s work§ 19:9 Multiple defendants§ 19:10 Plaintiff—Infringing acts§ 19:11 Secondary liability§ 19:12 Plaintiff—Statute of limitations§ 19:13 Defendant§ 19:14 Statutory damages and attorney’s fees

CHAPTER 20. STATUTE OFLIMITATIONS§ 20:1 Introduction§ 20:1.50 Statute of limitations is an affirmative

defense§ 20:1.70 Review of statute-of-limitations rulings§ 20:2 The two types of statutes of limitations§ 20:3 The statutory provision§ 20:4 The copyright statute of limitations is

remedial§ 20:5 Statutory history of copyright statutes of

limitation§ 20:6 —The early state statutes§ 20:7 —The 1790 Act§ 20:8 —The 1831 Act§ 20:9 —The 1870 Act§ 20:10 — —Brady v. Daly§ 20:11 —The 1909 Act§ 20:12 —The 1957 Act§ 20:13 —The 1976 Act; section 507(b)§ 20:14 — —1997 Amendment to section 507(a)§ 20:14.50 VARA actions§ 20:15 Statutory history of copyright statutes of

limitation—Construction of section 507(b)§ 20:16 — —“Commencement” of the action§ 20:17 — —Does a claim “accrue” when the violation

occurred or when plaintiff discovered theclaim?

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

xcviii

§ 20:18 — — —Violation or discovery accrual?§ 20:19 — — —Use of discovery accrual in copyright

cases§ 20:20 — — —Use of violation accrual in copyright

cases§ 20:20.50 What does “discovery” mean?§ 20:21 Ongoing infringements§ 20:22 —The continuing violation doctrine§ 20:23 —The separate accrual rule§ 20:24 —The mysterious case of the phantom circuit

split on continuing violations§ 20:25 The correct approach for determining statute

of limitations issues§ 20:26 —Discrete copying§ 20:27 —Continuing violations§ 20:28 The continuing violation doctrine in

copyright: a history—1909 Act opinions§ 20:29 —1976 Act opinions§ 20:30 — —Taylor v. Meirick§ 20:31 — —Post-Taylor acceptance of the continuing

violation theory§ 20:32 —“Rejection” of Taylor§ 20:33 —The Fifth Circuit’s conclusion about accrual§ 20:33.50 Ongoing Infringements—Chicago Building

Design, P.C. v. Mongolian House, Inc.§ 20:34 “Continuing wrong” theory of third-party acts§ 20:35 Statute of limitations and ownership claims§ 20:36 —Case law on statute of limitations and

ownership claims§ 20:37 —Zuill v. Shanahan: the beginning of big

trouble§ 20:38 —Zuill v. Shanahan: the beginning of big

trouble—Merchant v. Levy§ 20:39 —Problems with Zuill-Merchant§ 20:39.50 — —Seven Arts Filmed Entertainment

Limited v. Content Media Corporation§ 20:40 —Problems with Zuill-Merchant—The

loophole: claim infringement instead§ 20:41 —Conclusion on Zuill-Merchant§ 20:42 —Kling v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.:

“Nonobvious” owners§ 20:42.50 Declaratory judgment of ownership as

defense§ 20:42.60 Claims for an accounting of profits and the

federal statute of limitations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xcixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 20:43 Statute of limitations and ownership claims—Accrual of ownership claims: Discovery orViolation rule?

§ 20:44 —Tolling and ownership claims§ 20:45 Statute of limitations in suits against the

United States Government and itscontractors

§ 20:45.50 Statute of limitations and secondary liability§ 20:46 Statute of limitations and relating back§ 20:46.50 Statute of limitations and section 411(a)§ 20:47 Variation of limitations period§ 20:48 Preemption of state savings statutes§ 20:49 Equitable doctrines invoked by plaintiffs—

Equitable tolling§ 20:50 —Fraudulent concealment§ 20:51 —Equitable estoppel§ 20:52 —Minors, mental incompetence and duress§ 20:53 Equitable doctrines invoked by defendants§ 20:54 —Laches§ 20:55 — —Laches within the limitations period§ 20:56 —Laches and summary judgment§ 20:57 —Laches—Equitable estoppel§ 20:58 —Equitable estoppel

CHAPTER 21. PARTIES

I. PLAINTIFFS§ 21:1 Standing§ 21:2 —Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)§ 21:3 —Lack of standing is not an affirmative

defense§ 21:4 —Statutory standing provisions§ 21:4.50 Parent and subsidiary corporations§ 21:5 Standing—Assignment of the mere right to

sue does not convey standing§ 21:6 —The United States as “parens patriae”§ 21:7 —“Copyright owner”§ 21:7.50 Employees for hire lack standing§ 21:8 Standing—“Copyright owner”—There is no

role for state law concepts of ownership§ 21:9 — —Divisibility§ 21:9.50 Standing to sue for infringement contrasted

with standing to register a claim tocopyright

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

c

§ 21:10 Standing—“Copyright owner”—Ownership ofthe right at the time it is infringed

§ 21:11 —VARA rights and standing§ 21:12 —Derivative works and standing§ 21:13 —Nonexclusive licensees, including

performing rights societies, lack standing§ 21:14 —Requirements for standing§ 21:15 — —What are exclusive rights for section

501(b) purposes?§ 21:16 — —Agreements that restrict attributes of

exclusivity§ 21:17 — —Options§ 21:18 — —Right of first refusal§ 21:19 — —A right to receive royalties does not

provide standing§ 21:20 — —Distribution agreements§ 21:21 — —Management or administration rights§ 21:22 — —Owner of rights at the time of the

infringement and accrued causes of action§ 21:22.50 The rights must arise under U.S. law§ 21:23 Standing—The Anti-Assignment Act§ 21:24 —Noncopyright rights§ 21:25 —Beneficial owners§ 21:26 —Equitable trust theory of beneficial

ownership§ 21:27 —Who qualifies as a beneficial owner outside

of continuing royalty obligations§ 21:28 —Associational standing§ 21:29 Class actions§ 21:30 —Plaintiff classes§ 21:31 —Defendant classes§ 21:32 Joinder and indispensable parties§ 21:33 —Section 501(b) and the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure§ 21:34 —Possible conflicts between section 501 and

Fed. R. Civ. P. 19§ 21:35 —Intervention and Fed. R. Civ. P. 24§ 21:36 —Defendants and joinder

II. DEFENDANTS§ 21:37 In general§ 21:38 Copyright infringement as a strict liability

tort—In general§ 21:38.50 Ability of co-owners to license and to settle

litigation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ciK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 21:39 Copyright infringement as a strict liabilitytort—Strict liability and the Internet

§ 21:40 Direct infringement distinguished fromsecondary liability

§ 21:41 Types of secondary liability§ 21:42 Contributory infringement§ 21:43 —The 1976 Act§ 21:44 —Contributory infringement is not a form of

enterprise liability§ 21:45 —Roots of contributory infringement: pre-

1976 Act case law§ 21:46 —Requirements for contributory

infringement under the 1976 Act§ 21:47 — —Knowledge§ 21:48 — —Material contribution§ 21:48.50 Providing financial assistance is not itself a

material contribution§ 21:48.60 Contributory infringement—Requirements for

contributory infringement under the 1976Act—Affiliate relationships

§ 21:49 —The staple article of commerce—The Sonycase

§ 21:50 The inappropriateness of adopting the staple-article-of-commerce doctrine

§ 21:51 Contributory infringement—The history ofcontributory infringement and staple articleof commerce in patent law

§ 21:52 —What are substantial noninfringing uses?§ 21:53 —The relationship between substantial

noninfringing uses and knowledge§ 21:54 —Case law after Sony§ 21:55 —The Internet and contributory

infringement: the volitional act requirement§ 21:56 The Internet and contributory infringement:

the volitional act requirement—ReligiousTechnology Center v. Netcom On-LineCommunication Services, Inc.

§ 21:57 —A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.§ 21:58 —Fonovisa, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.§ 21:59 —Arista Recording, Inc. v. MP3Board, Inc.§ 21:60 —In re Aimster Copyright Litigation§ 21:61 —MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.§ 21:61.50 —Luvdarts, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC§ 21:62 Vicarious liability§ 21:63 —Case law on vicarious liability under the

1909 Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cii

§ 21:64 Case law on vicarious liability under the1909 Act—Landlord-tenant line of decisions

§ 21:65 —Ballroom line of decisions§ 21:66 Requirements for vicarious liability§ 21:67 —Right to supervise§ 21:68 —Direct financial benefit§ 21:69 Vicarious liability—Trade shows and flea

markets§ 21:70 — —Fonovisa, Inc. v. Cherry Auction Inc.§ 21:71 — —Adobe Systems Inc. v. Canus

Productions, Inc.§ 21:72 —Sponsorship§ 21:73 —Vicarious liability and the Internet§ 21:74 — —A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.§ 21:75 — —Ellison v. Robertson§ 21:76 — —In re Aimster Copyright Litigation§ 21:77 — —MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Inc.§ 21:77.50 — — —The Perfect 10 cases§ 21:77.60 — —Luvdarts, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC§ 21:78 —Does the staple-article-of-commerce

doctrine apply to vicarious liability?§ 21:79 Inducement liability and availability of the

staple-article-of-commerce doctrine apply toinducement claims

§ 21:80 Independent liability for independentcontractors

§ 21:81 Vicarious liability—Individual liability ofcompany employees

§ 21:82 —Apparent authority§ 21:83 —Liability of parent corporations for

subsidiaries§ 21:84 The Audio Home Recording Act§ 21:85 Digital Millennium Copyright Act§ 21:85.10 DMCA safe harbors apply to pre-1972 sound

recordings§ 21:86 United States government as defendant§ 21:87 Sovereign immunity—DMCA application§ 21:88 —State governments§ 21:88.10 —Territories§ 21:88.20 Qualified immunity§ 21:89 Sovereign immunity—Tribal immunity§ 21:90 Suits against foreign governments

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ciiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

CHAPTER 22. REMEDIES

I. GENERALLY§ 22:1 Introduction§ 22:1.50 Calabresi and Melamed’s one view of the

cathedral§ 22:2 The early English chancery decisions§ 22:3 Injunctive relief under pre-1976 U.S.

Copyright Acts—1790–1908§ 22:4 —The 1909 Act§ 22:5 The 1976 Act§ 22:6 Injunctive relief, Section 411(a), and enjoining

future works

II. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS

A. GENERALLY§ 22:7 The importance of interim injunctive relief§ 22:8 Abuse of discretion review and the reality of

appellate practice§ 22:9 Temporary restraining orders are not appealable§ 22:10 The purpose of preliminary injunctions: to

preserve a meaningful trial on the merits, notto preserve the status quo

§ 22:11 Judge Posner’s error-avoidance methodology§ 22:12 Rhetoric and reality in preliminary injunction

decision making§ 22:13 Why rhetoric diverges from reality§ 22:14 Preliminary injunctions are not automatic§ 22:15 The standards for temporary injunctive relief

B. THE TWO-FACTOR TEST: SECOND ANDNINTH CIRCUITS

§ 22:16 Second Circuit§ 22:17 The Ninth Circuit’s two-factor and four-factor

formulations§ 22:18 Differences between the Second and Ninth

Circuit tests§ 22:19 First alternative or position on the continuum§ 22:20 Second alternative or position on the continuum

C. THE TRADITIONAL FOUR-FACTOR TEST

§ 22:21 The Supreme Court

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

civ

§ 22:22 First Circuit§ 22:23 Third Circuit§ 22:24 Fourth Circuit§ 22:25 Fifth Circuit§ 22:26 Sixth Circuit§ 22:27 Seventh Circuit§ 22:28 Eighth Circuit§ 22:29 Tenth Circuit§ 22:30 Eleventh Circuit§ 22:31 District of Columbia Circuit

D. EVALUATION OF THE FOUR FACTORS§ 22:32 Generally§ 22:33 The first and threshold requirement:

irreparable harm§ 22:34 How much irreparable harm is necessary?§ 22:35 Irreparable injury/inadequate remedy at law:

and or or?§ 22:36 The irreparable harm must be immediate§ 22:37 What constitutes irreparable harm§ 22:38 Fleeting fame as irreparable harm§ 22:39 Seasonal works§ 22:40 Financial ruin and insolvency or defendant’s

inability to pay a judgment§ 22:41 Confusion in the market, goodwill and

reputation§ 22:42 The effect of statutory damages on

irreparable harm§ 22:43 Willfulness§ 22:44 Presumption of irreparable harm and its

disastrous impact on decision making§ 22:45 —History of the presumption§ 22:46 —Federal Rule of Evidence 301 and the

bursting bubble of presumptions§ 22:47 —Rule 301 and copyright cases§ 22:48 —Post-American Metropolitan opinions§ 22:49 —Adoption of the presumption in other

circuits§ 22:50 —The weak rationale for the presumption§ 22:51 —Defining the market§ 22:52 —The Ninth Circuit’s singular approach: how

to take a bad idea and make it much, muchworse

§ 22:53 —Continuum or sliding scale: “fuzzy logic”and the Ninth Circuit’s unfuzzy approach

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 22:54 —The Seventh Circuit: a multidimensionalapproach

§ 22:55 —Algebraic models: American HospitalSupply Corp. v. Hospital Products Ltd.

§ 22:56 —Rebutting the presumption by showingdelay

§ 22:57 —Visual Artists Rights Act: the presumptionapplies

§ 22:58 —Digital Millennium Copyright Act: thepresumption doesn’t apply

§ 22:59 —Contract versus copyright cases: when doesthe presumption apply?

§ 22:60 The second factor: likelihood of success on themerits

§ 22:61 How much success is required before successbecomes “likely”?

§ 22:62 The third factor: balance of hardships§ 22:63 Size of the defendant’s infringing activity§ 22:64 The fourth factor: the public interest§ 22:65 Cessation of infringement§ 22:66 Preliminary injunctions as a prior restraint§ 22:67 Giving notice§ 22:68 Is an evidentiary hearing necessary for a

preliminary injunction to issue?§ 22:69 Specificity of the injunction: Fed. R. Civ. P.

52(a), 65(d)§ 22:70 Burden of proof in preliminary injunction

cases where an affirmative defense isasserted

§ 22:71 Mandatory injunctions§ 22:72 Security: bonding the injunction§ 22:73 Injunctions involving architectural plans and

architectural works§ 22:73.50 Extraterritorial injunctions

III. PERMANENT INJUNCTIONS§ 22:74 Generally§ 22:75 Permanent injunctions versus continuing royalty

obligations§ 22:76 [Deleted]§ 22:77 Permanent injunctions not to infringe works not

yet created or not at issue§ 22:78 Permanent injunctions and monetary damages

IV. RECALL§ 22:79 Generally

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cvi

§ 22:80 Recall at the preliminary injunction stage§ 22:81 Recall at the permanent injunction stage

V. IMPOUNDMENT, SEIZURE, ANDDESTRUCTION: SECTIONS 503 AND 509

A. GENERALLY§ 22:82 History of statutory provisions—The 1909 Act§ 22:83 Supreme Court rules§ 22:84 The 1976 Act

B. EX PARTE RELIEF—SEIZURE

§ 22:85 Generally

C. IMPOUNDMENT

§ 22:86 Generally

D. DESTRUCTION

§ 22:87 Generally

VI. MONETARY DAMAGES

A. GENERALLY

§ 22:88 Monetary damages

B. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

§ 22:89 The 1790 Act§ 22:90 The 1802 Act§ 22:91 The 1831 Act§ 22:92 The 1856 Act§ 22:93 The 1870 Act§ 22:94 The 1895 Act§ 22:95 The 1909 Act§ 22:96 The 1976 Act: actual damages and profits—

Legislative history§ 22:97 —Statutory language§ 22:98 —The 1976 Act legislative reports§ 22:99 Limitation on remedies where notice was

omitted§ 22:100 Purposes for awarding damages and profits§ 22:100.50 No actual damages without registration§ 22:101 Actual damages

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 22:101.25 Actual damages recovery against the UnitedStates government

§ 22:101.50 Review of actual damages§ 22:102 Actual damages—No presumption of actual

damages§ 22:103 —Actual damages claims may not be

speculative and must be related to theinfringement

§ 22:104 —Proof of a causal link§ 22:105 —Market saturation and damages§ 22:106 —Destruction of the market and damages§ 22:107 —Lack of attribution, noninfringing acts,

and goodwill—Lack of attribution§ 22:108 —Goodwill and hurt feelings§ 22:109 —Development costs§ 22:109.50 Corrective advertising§ 22:110 Actual damages—Deductions from plaintiff’s

recovery§ 22:111 —Lost licensing fees as actual damages§ 22:112 No double recovery of overlapping awards of

plaintiff’s damages and defendant’s profits§ 22:113 Actual damages—Avoiding double recovery

for other causes of action, including theLanham Act

§ 22:114 —Joint and several liability for damages§ 22:115 Defendant’s profits—Legislative history—

The 1909 Act§ 22:116 — —The 1976 Act§ 22:117 —Plaintiff’s burden§ 22:118 —No presumption of profits attributable to

the infringement§ 22:119 —Claims for defendant’s profits may not be

speculative§ 22:120 —Doubts are resolved in plaintiff’s favor§ 22:121 —Defendant’s burden§ 22:121.50 Definition of “Gross Revenue”§ 22:122 Defendant’s profits—Definition of “profit”§ 22:123 —Monetary remedies for infringement of

architectural works and plans§ 22:124 —Value of the use and saved acquisition

costs as profits—An end run around thestatute

§ 22:125 —The origins of the value-of-the-useapproach

§ 22:126 — —Deltak, Inc. v. Advanced Systems,

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cviii

Inc.—The district court: Judge Posner getsit right

§ 22:127 — — —The court of appeals gets it wrong§ 22:128 —Value of the use and saved acquisition

costs as profits—Post-Deltak decisionswithin the Seventh Circuit

§ 22:129 — —An end run around the statute—TheSecond Circuit: Business Trends and Davis

§ 22:130 — —A final word§ 22:131 —Indirect profits§ 22:132 — —Ninth Circuit§ 22:133 — —The Fifth Circuit§ 22:134 — —The Eighth Circuit§ 22:135 — —The Fourth Circuit§ 22:136 — —The Second Circuit§ 22:137 — —The Sixth Circuit§ 22:138 —Goodwill to defendant§ 22:139 —Proof of deductible expenses and

apportionment of noninfringing profits§ 22:140 — —Direct expenses§ 22:141 — —Overheard and other fixed expenses:

incremental or full absorption approach?§ 22:142 — —Deduction for unsold goods§ 22:143 — —Overhead deductions and willful

infringement§ 22:144 — —Deduction of taxes§ 22:145 —Apportionment§ 22:146 — —Sheldon v. MGM Pictures Corp.§ 22:147 — —The 1976 Act§ 22:148 —Several liability for profits§ 22:149 —Is there a right to a jury for an accounting

of defendant’s profits?§ 22:150 —Foreign revenues§ 22:151 Punitive damages§ 22:152 Review of actual damages and profits

awards§ 22:153 Section 504(c): statutory damages—

Statutory language§ 22:154 —Section 101(b) of the 1909 Act§ 22:155 —Legislative history of the 1976 Act—The

Register of Copyrights’ 1961 report andrecommendation

§ 22:156 — —The Register of Copyrights’ 1963 draftbill

§ 22:157 — —The 1964 revision bills

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 22:158 — —The 1965 revision bills and theRegister’s supplementary report

§ 22:159 — —The 1966 house judiciary committeereport

§ 22:160 — —The 1969 revision bill§ 22:161 — —The 1976 Act Judiciary Committee

Reports§ 22:162 —The 1988 Berne Convention

Implementation Act§ 22:163 —The Digital Theft Deterrence and

Copyright Damages Improvement Act of1999

§ 22:164 —How section 504(c) operates—Who awardsstatutory damages: the court or the jury?

§ 22:165 — —How to ask for a jury and how to losethe right

§ 22:165.50 Forfeiting statutory damages in bankruptcyactions

§ 22:166 Section 504(c): statutory damages—65(a)(2):consolidations and the right to a jury

§ 22:167 —How section 504(c) operates—Right to ajury under VARA actions

§ 22:168 — —Election of damages§ 22:169 — — —Who elects?§ 22:170 — — —What does one elect?§ 22:171 — — —How does one elect?§ 22:171.50 — — —Election of one form of nonstatutory

damages does not preclude other form ofrecovery

§ 22:172 — — —Who decides what when?§ 22:173 — — —Can plaintiff “unelect” statutory or

actual damages/profits?§ 22:174 — —Factors in awarding statutory damages§ 22:175 — —The four categories of infringers for

section 504(c) purposes§ 22:176 — — —Category one: no statutory damage

award§ 22:177 — — —Category two: innocent infringers§ 22:178 — — — —Omission of notice and innocent

infringement§ 22:179 — — —Category three: “ordinary” infringers§ 22:180 — — —Category four: willful infringers§ 22:181 — — — —Willfulness and deterrence:

individual or general?§ 22:182 — — — —Willfulness and advice of counsel:

the Bilzerian decision

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cx

§ 22:183 — — — —Willful infringement andsummary judgment

§ 22:184 —One work, one award§ 22:185 — —One award for multiple works:

compilations and derivative works§ 22:186 — —Musical works and sound recordings

embodied in phonorecords§ 22:187 — —Educational works and training

materials§ 22:188 — —Graphic works§ 22:189 —The number of registrations not

determinative§ 22:190 —The independent economic life theory§ 22:191 —One award for multiple violations of a

single work§ 22:192 —Statutory damages and the time period of

the infringement§ 22:192.25 Damages Improvement Act of 1999—No

failure to mitigate damages defense whereonly statutory damages are sought

§ 22:192.50 Only one award regardless of the number ofdefendants

§ 22:193 Section 504(c): statutory damages—Multipleawards for different violations by differentdefendants

§ 22:193.50 Statutory damage awards and due process§ 22:194 Section 504(c): statutory damages—Joint

and several liability for statutory damages§ 22:195 — —Legislative history§ 22:196 — —Determining joint or several liability

for statutory damages§ 22:197 — —Joint and several liability when only

one defendant is a willful infringer§ 22:198 —No apportionment or deductions for

statutory damages§ 22:198.50 Joint or several recovery for statutory

damages?§ 22:199 Section 504(c): statutory damages—

Discovery and statutory damages§ 22:200 —Must there be a trial for an award of

statutory damages?§ 22:201 —Section 412: statutory damages slayer

statutory provision§ 22:201.25 Post-registration, statutory damages and

joint and several liability§ 22:201.50 Section 412 applies to foreign works

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 22:202 Section 504(c): statutory damages—Publication and section 412

§ 22:203 —Collective work registration§ 22:204 —Section 412 and prevailing defendants§ 22:205 —Section 412 and co-owners§ 22:206 —Statutory damages against the United

States§ 22:207 —Review of statutory damage awards—The

1909 Act§ 22:208 — —The 1976 Act§ 22:208.50 Due process considerations

C. ATTORNEY’S FEES

§ 22:209 Generally§ 22:210 Attorney’s fees§ 22:210.50 Attorney’s fees in contracts§ 22:211 Who is a prevailing party?§ 22:212 Attorney’s fees and section 412§ 22:212.50 No relationship between nonelection of

statutory damages and attorney’s fees§ 22:213 Attorney’s fees and Rule 68 offer of

judgment§ 22:214 —The purpose of Fed. R. Civ. P. 68§ 22:215 —Is there a conflict between section 505 and

Fed. R. Civ. P. 68?§ 22:216 —Marek v. Chesny: attorney’s fees as

costs—Marek v. Chesny§ 22:217 — —Decisions construing whether

attorney’s fees may be awarded to adefendant under Rule 68

§ 22:218 — —Interpretation of Marek v. Chesny’s“properly awardable” phrase

§ 22:219 —The operation of Rule 68§ 22:220 —Comparison of offer to relief obtained in

final judgment§ 22:221 Costs

D. PREJUDGMENT INTEREST

§ 22:222 Generally

E. JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY FORATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS

§ 22:222.50 Generally

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxii

F. CRIMINAL PENALTIES§ 22:223 Generally

Volume 7

CHAPTER 23. INTERNATIONALCOPYRIGHT

I. U.S. PROTECTION OF FOREIGN AUTHORS§ 23:1 Overview of protection for foreign works in the

United States§ 23:1.50 Copyright treaties and trade agreements are

not self-executing§ 23:2 Introduction§ 23:3 The long march toward international

copyright: 1837-1891§ 23:4 U.S. protection for foreign authors—The Chace

Act§ 23:5 —The Mexico City Copyright Convention of

1902§ 23:6 —The Louisiana Purchase Exposition Act of

1904§ 23:7 —The Ad Interim Act of 1905§ 23:8 —The 1909 Act§ 23:9 —The Buenos Aires Convention of 1910§ 23:10 Early efforts by United States to join Berne

Convention§ 23:11 Adherence to Universal Copyright Convention§ 23:12 1971 revision to Universal Copyright

Convention§ 23:13 Geneva Phonograms Convention§ 23:14 Brussels Satellite Convention§ 23:15 1976 Act, as amended

II. BERNE CONVENTION§ 23:16 Overview§ 23:17 Article 2: protected subject matter§ 23:18 Article 2bis: limitations on certain subject

matter§ 23:19 Article 3: points of attachment§ 23:20 Article 4: special points of attachment for

cinematographic works and works ofarchitecture

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 23:21 Article 5: national treatment, automaticprotection, country of origin

§ 23:22 Article 6: retaliation against works of nonunionauthors

§ 23:23 Article 6bis: moral rights§ 23:24 Article 7: term of protection§ 23:25 Article 8: the right of translation§ 23:26 Article 9: the right of reproduction and

exceptions to the right§ 23:27 Article 10: other exceptions§ 23:28 Article 10bis: exceptions for the press§ 23:29 Article 11: right of public performance§ 23:30 Article 11bis: the right of broadcasting and

communication to the public§ 23:31 Article 11ter: right of public recitation§ 23:32 Article 12: right to prepare adaptations§ 23:33 Article 13: mechanical compulsory license§ 23:34 Article 14: adaptation of literary and artistic

works in cinematographic works§ 23:35 Article 14bis: protection for cinematographic

works§ 23:36 Article 14ter: droit de suite§ 23:37 Article 15: presumption of authorship§ 23:38 Article 16: seizure of infringing goods§ 23:39 Article 17: government censorship§ 23:40 Article 18: retroactive application of the

convention§ 23:41 Article 19: the effect of the convention on

national legislation§ 23:42 Article 20: bilateral agreements§ 23:43 Article 21: appendix for developing countries§ 23:44 Articles 22 through 38: administrative and

transitional provisions§ 23:45 United States adherence to the Berne

Convention

III. 1996 WIPO TREATIES§ 23:46 Overview§ 23:47 The Copyright Treaty§ 23:48 The WIPO Performances and Phonograms

Treaty

IV. TRADE LEGISLATION

A. INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS§ 23:49 Overview

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxiv

§ 23:50 The Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act(CBI)

§ 23:51 Generalized System of Preferences (GSP)§ 23:52 International Trade and Investment Act of 1984§ 23:53 The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of

1988§ 23:54 The United States–Canada Free Trade

Agreement (CFTA)§ 23:55 The North American Free Trade Agreement

(NAFTA)§ 23:56 The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

(GATT)

B. ANALYSIS OF TRIPS

§ 23:57 Article 1(3): nature and scope of obligations§ 23:58 Article 3(1): national treatment§ 23:59 Article 4: most-favored-nation treatment§ 23:60 Article 6: exhaustion§ 23:61 Article 8(2): principles§ 23:62 Article 9: relation to the Berne Convention§ 23:63 Article 10: computer programs and compilations

of data§ 23:64 Article 11: rental rights§ 23:65 Article 12: term of protection§ 23:66 Article 13: limitations and exceptions§ 23:67 Article 14: protection of performers, producers of

phonograms (sound recordings), andbroadcasting organizations

§ 23:68 TRIPs effective dates

V. OTHER REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS

§ 23:69 Free trade agreements§ 23:70 CAFTA-DR§ 23:71 Bilateral agreements

VI. MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES

§ 23:72 Manufacturing clause§ 23:73 The Customs Service and section 603§ 23:74 —Customs Service§ 23:75 U.S. International Trade Commission: Section

337 actions§ 23:76 The European Union

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

CHAPTER 24. THE GATTAMENDMENTS: THE URUGUAY ROUNDAGREEMENTS ACT§ 24:1 Introduction§ 24:1.50 The TRIPS Agreement is not a treaty and is

not self-executing§ 24:2 Enactment of Uruguay Round Agreements Act§ 24:3 Copyright components of URAA§ 24:4 Section 511: computer program rental§ 24:5 Sections 512 and 513: “bootlegs of live musical

performances”§ 24:6 —Section 512: civil cause of action—Right

granted§ 24:7 — — —Constitutional basis of the right§ 24:8 — — —Consent to fixation§ 24:9 — — —Music videos§ 24:10 — — —Reproduction, distribution, and

transmission of live musical performances§ 24:11 — — —National eligibility requirements§ 24:12 — — —Violation of right and remedies§ 24:13 — — —Duration of right§ 24:14 — — —Protection of preexisting live musical

performances§ 24:15 —No preemption of state laws§ 24:16 —Section 513: criminal provisions of bootlegs§ 24:17 Section 514: retroactivity§ 24:18 —Retroactivity and the Berne Convention§ 24:19 —United States copyright law and

retroactivity: pre-Berne adherence era§ 24:20 —Phonorecord and computer program rental§ 24:21 —United States adherence to Berne and

retroactivity§ 24:22 North American Free Trade Agreement§ 24:23 Retroactivity under the URAA: foreign works

only§ 24:24 Effective date§ 24:25 —Date of restoration§ 24:26 —Copyright Office’s about-face§ 24:27 —President Clinton’s illegal proclamation§ 24:28 —1997 legislative effort§ 24:29 Automatic restoration§ 24:30 Exclusion from protection: Alien Property

Custodian works: section 104A(a)(2)§ 24:31 Ownership of restored copyright: section

104A(b)

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxvi

§ 24:32 —Definition of “restored work”§ 24:33 Exclusion from protections expiration of term:

sections 104A(h)(6)(B), (C)§ 24:34 Grounds for restoration§ 24:35 Sound recordings§ 24:36 Duration of protection in restored works§ 24:37 Remedies: section 104A(d)§ 24:38 Remedies against nonreliance parties: section

104A(d)(1)§ 24:39 Remedies against reliance parties: section

104A(d)(2) to (4)§ 24:40 Continuing infringement and reliance party

status§ 24:41 Successors to and assignees of reliance parties§ 24:42 Notices of intent and the cutoff of reliance

party immunity§ 24:43 Derivative works: section 104A(d)(3)§ 24:44 Contributory infringement and statutory

damages§ 24:45 Filing of notice of intent with Copyright Office

or directly on reliance party: section 104A(e)§ 24:46 Filing notice with Copyright Office: section

104A(e)(1)§ 24:47 Filing notice on reliance party: section

104A(e)(2)(A)§ 24:48 Filing with Copyright Office and on a reliance

party§ 24:49 Simultaneous registration and filing notice of

intent with Copyright Office§ 24:50 Immunity from warranty and specific

performance: section 104A(f)§ 24:51 Constitutionality of the restoration provisions

Appendix A. Uruguay Round Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual PropertyRights, Including Trade in CounterfeitGoods (TRIPs)

Appendix B. President Clinton’s December 15, 1993,Memorandum Notifying Congress ofIntent to Enter into the Uruguay RoundAgreements

Appendix C. Office of Legal Counsel July 29, 1994,Memorandum on Constitutionality ofRetroactive Copyright Protection

Appendix D. H.R. 4894 and Representative Hughes’Floor Statement

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxviiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

Appendix E. S. 2368 and Senator DeConcini’s FloorStatement

Appendix F. Text of the Uruguay Round Agreements ActAppendix G. Statement of Administrative ActionAppendix H. Representative Hughes’ October 8, 1994,

Floor Statement on Passage of the RuleAppendix I. Senate Judiciary Committee Statement on

the ActAppendix J. Representative Hughes’ and Representative

Berman’s November 29, 1994, FloorStatements on Passage of the Act

Appendix K. Senator Leahy’s December 1, 1994, FloorStatement on Passage of the Act

Appendix L. President Clinton’s December 23, 1994,Proclamation on the Effective Date of theUruguay Round Agreements

Appendix M. Copyright Office’s February 9, 1995, Noticeof Policy Decision on Effective Date

Appendix N. President Clinton’s March 23, 1995,Proclamation

CHAPTER 25. CHOICE OF LAW, FORUMSELECTION, ANDEXTRATERRITORIALITY

I. CHOICE OF LAW

A. INTRODUCTION§ 25:0.50 There is no choice of law within the United

States§ 25:1 In general

B. HISTORICAL THEORIES§ 25:2 An overview of choice-of-law theories§ 25:3 Ancient roots of choice of law§ 25:4 —The Talmud§ 25:5 —The Egyptians§ 25:6 Unilateral versus multilateral: statuists versus

Savigny§ 25:7 The First Restatement of Conflict of Laws§ 25:8 The Second Restatement of Conflict of Laws§ 25:9 Contemporary theories

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxviii

§ 25:10 The quaking quagmires

C. ISSUES PRESENTED BY COPYRIGHTCHOICE-OF-LAW ANALYSIS

§ 25:11 The situs of intangible property§ 25:12 Conflicts between U.S. and foreign laws

D. A PROPOSED UNILATERALMETHODOLOGY

1. In General§ 25:13 Constitutional provisions

2. Elements of a Copyright Prima Facie Case

a. In General§ 25:14 Introduction

b. Choice of Law and Originality§ 25:15 Generally

c. Subject Matter and Choice of Law

(1) In General§ 25:16 Subject matter§ 25:17 How many copyrights are there?§ 25:18 Is copyright “territorial”?§ 25:18.50 Simultaneous publication on the Internet: is

there only U.S. law now?

(2) National Treatment§ 25:19 Generally§ 25:20 Hasbro-Bradley: confusion of national treatment

with national eligibility§ 25:21 Confusion of national treatment with national

eligibility§ 25:22 What is national treatment?§ 25:23 National treatment and reciprocity§ 25:24 National treatment and the convention minima§ 25:25 National treatment is a nondiscrimination

principle, not a choice-of-law provision§ 25:26 National treatment is a law of foreign, not

domestic, work§ 25:27 What rights are subject to national treatment?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxixK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

§ 25:28 Locating the country “where protection isclaimed”

(3) Authorship and Choice of Law

(a) The Berne Convention§ 25:29 Analysis of Article 5

(b) United States StatutoryChoice-of-Law Rules onOwnership

§ 25:30 17 U.S.C.A. § 104A

(c) The Federal Common Law ofCopyright Conflicts

(i) Generally§ 25:31 Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian

Kurier, Inc.§ 25:32 Customary international law as

interpretative federal common law§ 25:33 Customary international law as an

independent source of law§ 25:34 —CIL as a canon of construction§ 25:35 —CIL and extraterritoriality§ 25:36 Origin of customary international law (CIL)§ 25:37 —Traditional v. modern customary

international law§ 25:38 The shaky foundation of modern customary

international law (CIL)§ 25:39 —Sources of authority for CIL§ 25:40 —When is customary law “international” in

scope?§ 25:41 Application of customary international law in

copyright cases§ 25:42 The Charming Betsy canon of construction§ 25:43 The Charming Betsy canon of construction—

Berne and the Charming Betsy§ 25:44 Itar-Tass’s choice-of-law solution§ 25:45 Dépeçage§ 25:46 Ownership determined by the country of

origin§ 25:47 Connecting factors§ 25:48 —Domicile versus nationality§ 25:49 —Place of first publication or first availability

to the public

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxx

§ 25:49.50 Location of computer servers§ 25:50 Connecting factors—Place of creation§ 25:51 Multiple authors§ 25:52 How to weigh connecting factors§ 25:53 Summary on connecting factors§ 25:54 The special case of cinematographic works§ 25:55 Relationship of Article 14bis(2)(a) to other

works

(ii) Ownership by Assignment:Copyright or Contract Choiceof Law?

§ 25:56 Generally§ 25:57 National copyright laws restricting assignments§ 25:58 The copyright approach§ 25:59 Operation of law§ 25:60 The contract approach§ 25:61 —Place of the contract§ 25:62 —Place of performance§ 25:63 —Location of the subject matter§ 25:64 —Domicile, residency, and nationality

(iii) Characterization: The RealProblem

§ 25:65 Generally§ 25:66 Married women’s contracts revisited§ 25:67 Use of “arising under” analysis as a

characterization tool§ 25:68 The forum determines characterization: renvoi

(4) Duration of Protection

(a) In General§ 25:69 Generally

(b) Renewal§ 25:70 Generally§ 25:71 In a foreign court where a U.S. work in public

domain in the United States for failure torenew, but not in public domain in foreigncountry

§ 25:72 Dispute over whether a contract between aforeign author and his or her assigneeconveyed the U.S. renewal right

§ 25:73 Where an author of a 1909 Act work dies beforethe renewal period vests, but previously

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxxiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

assigned the renewal right, does U.S. or foreignlaw apply?

(c) Termination of Transfers§ 25:74 Generally

II. FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES§ 25:75 Generally§ 25:76 Forum selection clauses§ 25:77 Public policy exception to forum selection

clauses§ 25:78 Noncontractual disputes

III. PLEADING AND PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW§ 25:79 Generally

IV. CHOICE OF LAW FOR INFRINGEMENT

A. GENERALLY§ 25:80 U.S. law applies to originality and

infringement in the United States§ 25:80.10 Law of the country of origin applies to

transfers§ 25:80.50 Infringement of distribution right: Point of

sale§ 25:81 Multinational infringements§ 25:81.50 Enforcing foreign copyright judgments§ 25:82 Customary international law redux: calls for

applying supranational copyright lawinfringement

B. THE CORRECT METHODOLOGY FORCHOICE-OF-LAW AND INFRINGEMENTCLAIMS

§ 25:83 Applying foreign law to foreign claims§ 25:84 Retaining U.S. claims but dismissing foreign

claims§ 25:85 Retaining jurisdiction over all claims and

applying U.S. law to all claims

V. EXTRATERRITORIALITY

A. GENERALLY§ 25:86 The nonextraterritoriality of the Copyright

Act

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxxii

§ 25:86.10 Extraterritoriality and secondary liability§ 25:86.20 When are acts extraterritorial?§ 25:87 The relationship of direct infringement to

contributory infringement§ 25:87.50 Server location and the display and making

available rights

B. A WORK IS INFRINGED INITIALLY IN THEUNITED STATES AND THEN ADDITIONALACTS ARE COMMITTED OVERSEAS,FACILITATED BY THE U.S.INFRINGEMENT

1. In General§ 25:88 Generally§ 25:89 Sheldon v. MGM Pictures Corp.§ 25:90 The Predicate Act doctrine: Update Art, Inc.,

v. Modiin Publishing, Ltd.§ 25:91 Aramco overrules Update Art§ 25:92 The Ninth Circuit’s “one-complete-act” theory§ 25:92.50 The Fourth Circuit goes way, way off the

deep end: Tire Engineering & Distribution,LLC v. Shandong Linglong RubberCompany, Ltd.

§ 25:92.60 Acts committed wholly within the UnitedStates that cause damage outside theUnited States

2. The Special Case of Transmissions§ 25:93 Generally§ 25:94 Allarcom Pay Television, Ltd., v. General

Instrument Corp.§ 25:95 National Football League v. PrimeTime 24

Joint Venture§ 25:96 —The trial court§ 25:97 —The Court of Appeals§ 25:98 —Argument one: the curious case of the

vanishing public§ 25:99 —Argument two: it’s the receiving, not the

transmitting, that matters§ 25:100 —Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. iCrave

TV§ 25:101 Los Angeles News Service v. Conus

Communications Co. Ltd

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxxiiiK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020

C. A WORK IS INFRINGED INITIALLY IN THEUNITED STATES AND THEN INFRINGEDOVERSEAS BY DISCRETE ACTS NOTDEPENDENT UPON THE U.S.INFRINGEMENT

§ 25:102 Generally

D. A WORK IS INITIALLY INFRINGEDOVERSEAS AND THEN ADDITIONAL ACTSARE COMMITTED IN THE UNITEDSTATES

§ 25:103 Generally

E. A WORK IS INITIALLY INFRINGEDOVERSEAS AND IS THEN INFRINGED INTHE UNITED STATES BY A DISCRETE ACTWHICH IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON THEOVERSEAS INFRINGEMENT

§ 25:104 Generally

VI. COPYRIGHT IS NOT A TRANSITORY TORT§ 25:105 Generally

CHAPTER 26. THE REGISTER OFCOPYRIGHTS SELECTION ANDACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017§ 26:1 Origins of the Copyright Office§ 26:2 The 1909 Act§ 26:3 The 1976 Act§ 26:4 The Register of Copyrights Selection and

Accountability Act of 2017

Volume 8

APPENDICESAppendix A Copyright EnactmentsAppendix B Examination of Claims to Copyright

Table of Laws and Rules

Table of Cases

PATRY ON COPYRIGHT

cxxiv

Index

TABLE OF CONTENTS

cxxvK 2020 Thomson Reuters, Rel. 25, 3/2020