The Law Lady. For more info about us, click here. To be added to our email circulation with MUCH, MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL, HEALTH & INSURANCE, 11th CIRCUIT, or all FEDERAL Recent Decisions of Interest.
Friday, May 30, 2014
Copyright infringement, laches, temporary restraining order and asparagus hot grilled with walnut oil, garlic, and mediterranean herbs
Copyright -- Infringement --
Limitation of actions -- Laches cannot be invoked to bar relief on copyright
infringement claim brought within three-year window of Section 507(b) of the
Copyright Act -- While laches cannot be invoked to preclude adjudication of
claim for damages brought within Act's three-year window, in extraordinary
circumstances laches may, at very threshold of litigation, curtail the relief
equitably awarded -- Where petitioner, in her suit for copyright infringement,
sought relief solely for conduct occurring within three-year limitations
period, lower courts' position that laches barred petitioner's suit in its entirety,
without regard to currency of conduct complained of, was contrary to Section
507(b) and Supreme Court's precedent on province of laches
PAULA PETRELLA, Petitioner v.
METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER, INC., et al. U.S. Supreme Court.
Injunctions -- Temporary restraining
order -- Inexcusable delay -- Motion for TRO to prevent the sale of counterfeit
merchandise outside concert venue is denied where plaintiff's decision to wait
until seven days prior to concert to seek injunctive relief constituted
inexcusable delay resulting in a manufactured emergency violative of local
rules and Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure -- TRO is also deniable on basis
that plaintiff neglected to estimate the number of “bootleggers” expected,
value of seized merchandise, or a reasonable amount of security -- TRO is
unreasonably broad where it names unknown and unnamed “John Doe” defendants,
seeks to extend injunction to a ten mile radius around concert venues, and
unacceptably permits federal, state, and local law enforcement to assign service
and seizure of the unauthorized merchandise to “anyone acting under their
supervision”
BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP
MERCHANDISING SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff, v. MIKE SMITH, JOHN DOES 1-100, JANE
DOES 1-100, XYZ COMPANY, Defendants. U.S. District Court, Middle District of
Florida, Tampa Division.
The Law Lady. For more info about us, click here. To be added to our email circulation with MUCH, MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL, HEALTH & INSURANCE, 11th CIRCUIT, or all FEDERAL Recent Decisions of Interest.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.