• Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

~ Trademark and Copyright Law Updates in Indiana

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

Category Archives: Litigation

Copyright lawsuit filed over Chicago skyscraper photograph

20 Wednesday Mar 2019

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Copyright, Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Copyright Infringement, Integrity of Copyright Management Information, Photography

Here’s yet another photography copyright lawsuit, this one involving the unauthorized reproduction and public display of a photograph of skyscrapers in Chicago.

The defendant, a corporation based in Fort Wayne, Indiana, allegedly used a  registered skyscraper photograph of plaintiff, an Oregon-based photographer, on their website without authorization.

Other than the RooR counterfeit bong cases, photography cases are the only ones being filed lately. Although I don’t expect anything unusual in this case, and predict a quick settlement, I’ll continue to monitor the lawsuit to see how it might differ from the multitudinous Bell cases.

Iwasaki v. Apollo Design Technology, Inc.

Court Case Number: 1:19-cv-00094
File Date: Monday, March 18, 2019
Plaintiff: Rich Iwasaki
Plaintiff Counsel: Richard Liebowitz of Liebowitz Law Firm, PLLC
Defendant: Apollo Design Technology, Inc.
Cause
: Copyright Infringement, Integrity of Copyright Management Information
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: TBD
Referred To: TBD

Complaint:

View this document on Scribd

Bell and Bongs continue to dominate Indiana Intellectual Property Filings

18 Monday Mar 2019

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Southern District of Indiana

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Architectural Drawings, Photography, Richard Bell

Skyline photographs and unauthorized bongs continue to be the primary driver of intellectual property litigation in Indiana in early March. Richard Bell’s internet-scouring spiders have apparently found another batch of entities that used his Indianapolis skyline photograph, including a big name, Eli Lilly and Company.

RooR has continued to crack down on Indiana smoke and vape shops for the alleged sale of counterfeit products. Surely news of these lawsuits has made the rounds of smoke shops owners by now, who will definitely want to be closely checking their inventory of RooR water pipes for authenticity, rather than wind up as next week’s defendant.

Regular filer Design Basics has also returned to protect a set of its architectural drawings.

Screen Shot 2019-03-18 at 5.12.05 AM.png

Supreme Court confirms that works must be registered before commencing copyright lawsuit

05 Tuesday Mar 2019

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Copyright, Intellectual Property, Legislation, Litigation, Supreme Court

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Fourth Estate, Special Handling

Screen Shot 2019-03-05 at 8.07.53 AM.png

The much-anticipated ruling for Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, LLC, et al. has arrived. Yesterday, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court, confirming that a work must be registered prior to commencing a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Held: Registration occurs, and a copyright claimant may commence an infringement suit, when the Copyright Office registers a copyright. Upon registration of the copyright, however, a copyright owner can recover for infringement that occurred both before and after registration.

This ruling confirms the literal reading of 17 U.S.C. §411(a), which states that “no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until … registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.”

Fourth Estate, a news organization, had argued that, because “registration is not a condition of copyright protection” under 17 U.S.C. §408(a), then §411(a) should not bar a copyright claimant from enforcing that protection in court once they have applied for registration.

Now it is clear that registration must be obtained before commencing a lawsuit. This means that copyright owners must be even more diligent about filing applications for their significant works. The time spent waiting on an application to register would normally remove any option of quick, decisive action by a copyright owner against an infringer.

The best option for late applicants will be the Copyright Office’s Special Handling procedure, which allows for registration in less than a week for an additional $800 Special Handling fee.

Justice Ginsburg’s opinion acknowledged the current administrative delay of the Copyright Office, acknowledging that Congress is in the best position to protect copyright claimants, either by increasing funding to the Copyright Office or revising the language of §411(a).

True, registration processing times have increased from one to two weeks in 1956 to many months today. Delays, in large part, are the result of Copyright Office staffing and budgetary shortages that Congress can alleviate, but courts cannot cure. Unfortunate as the current administrative lag may be, that factor does not allow this court to revise §411(a)’s congressionally composed text.

This blog will begin to monitor the real-world impact of this decision and report back periodically.

Counterfeit Bongs dominate the February Indiana IP Litigation Docket

01 Friday Mar 2019

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Copyright, Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Southern District of Indiana, Trade Dress, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Breach of Contract, Copyright Infringement, Federal False Designation of Origin, Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Integrity of Copyright Management Information, Photography, Richard Bell, Trade Dress Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Two photography cases, including one from serial filer Richard Bell, and a breach of franchise agreement lawsuit…other than that, the February Indiana IP litigation docket was totally dominated by filings by RooR International. RooR’s defendants are Indiana smokeshops and their alleged sale of counterfeit bongs.

RooR markets itself as “the premier manufacturer of glass water pipes by emphasizing the brand’s unwavering use of quality materials and focusing on scientific principles which facilitate a superior smoking experience.”

As you can see from the screenshot below, RooR International has gone on a recent filing spree to combat the sale of counterfeit products:

Screen Shot 2019-03-01 at 9.18.39 AM.png

RooR’s defendants, small smoke and vape shops from across Indiana, are accused of Federal Trademark Counterfeiting, Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal False Designation of Origin and Federal Unfair Competition. Heavy stuff.

Sample RooR Complaint

View this document on Scribd

The other non-bong, non-Bell cases involve the breach of a franchise agreement and the unauthorized use of a photograph of a New Year’s Eve fireworks display.

Baskin-Robbins Franchising LLC, BR IP Holder LLC v. Big Scoops, Inc., David M. Glasgow Jr.

View this document on Scribd

Bachner v. USA Halloween Planet Inc.

View this document on Scribd

Free Legal Resources in Indianapolis

27 Wednesday Feb 2019

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indianapolis, Intellectual Property, Litigation

≈ Leave a comment

Due to budgetary restrictions, the Marion County Law Library in Indianapolis ceased to operate in 2010 and hasn’t reopened.

If you’d like to do some free legal research or access court forms on your own,  there are still a few options. Computers with Internet access to court forms are available at public libraries around town and at the Central Library located at 40. E. St. Clair St., phone 317-275-4100.

You can do legal research at the Ruth Lilly Law Library in I.U. Robert H. McKinney School of Law (hours and access policies).

Please note that individual courts do not have forms and their staff cannot advise you on the use of appropriate forms or assist with filling them out.

For a free legal consultation (service availability is often based on income level), you may contact the following organizations:

  • Indiana Legal Aid Society: 317-635-9539
  • Legal Services: 317-631-9410
  • Neighborhood Christian Legal Clinic: 317-415-5337
  • Indianapolis Bar Association’s Lawyer Referral Service: 317-269-2222
  • Free Legal Line, every second Tuesday of the month, between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m: 317-269-2000
  • Legal Advice Hot Line, 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-Friday: 317-269-2222 ($35.00 for a 20-minute phone consultation with attorney)
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Categories

  • Advertising Law (1)
  • Artists (23)
  • Authors (20)
  • Bloggers (37)
  • Branding (29)
  • Business Law (9)
  • Copyright (332)
  • Dear KLF Legal (4)
  • Defamation (5)
  • Entertainment Law (14)
  • Estate Law (2)
  • Family Law (2)
  • Fashion (5)
  • Federal Initiatives (34)
  • Indiana (607)
  • Indianapolis (52)
  • Intellectual Property (670)
  • Just for Fun (25)
  • KLF Legal (19)
  • Legislation (34)
  • Litigation (601)
  • Musicians (13)
  • Nonprofit (6)
  • Northern District of Indiana (217)
  • Patent (44)
  • Privacy (15)
  • Right of Publicity (8)
  • Social Media (56)
  • Southern District of Indiana (370)
  • Stories from the Week that Was (42)
  • Supreme Court (13)
  • Tech Developments (119)
  • Trade Dress (26)
  • Trade Secret (15)
  • Trademark (369)
  • What I'm Reading (8)

Bloggers Copyright Federal Initiatives Indiana Indianapolis Intellectual Property Legislation Litigation Northern District of Indiana Patent Social Media Southern District of Indiana Stories from the Week that Was Tech Developments Trademark

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    Indiana Intellectual Property Blog
    Join 81 other subscribers

    Have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.

  • Indiana Intellectual Property Blog
    View site in Reader
    Manage subscriptionsSign upLog in
    Report this content
    Collapse this bar
Loading Comments...