BC Technical Inc. v. Ensil
International Corp.,
464 Fed. Appx. 689 (10th Cir. February 7, 2012)(unpublished). NY company agrees to repair circuit
boards. Utah company sends circuit
boards to be repaired. NY company does
not repair and keeps them for three years following the Utah company’s
cancellation of the contract and demand for return. After litigation commenced NY company claims
that the repair required illegal copying of copyright-protected software and
thus the repair contract was unenforceable.
NY company moved for judgment as a matter of law before and after
trial. Jury found NY company liable for
breach of contract and conversion.
Damages award not limited by economic loss rule governing contracts
because NY company converted circuit boards for three years after contract
cancelled, supporting additional damages.
Utah’s theft statute preempted by the Copyright Act. Even if repairing circuit boards required
engaging in copyright infringement, contract not proven to be illegal and thus
was enforceable. Trial court’s refusal
to include jury instruction on finding a contract requiring copyright
infringement to be illegal affirmed.
Legality of contract question for court, not the jury. Expert’s testimony regarding damages flowing
from failure to repair circuit boards was sufficiently reliable to be
admissible under Rule 702 of the Federal Rule of Evidence. Weaknesses in testimony due to omissions in
applying methodology were properly attacked on cross-examination. Since jury was free to use its “best
judgment” after listening to conflicting testimony on damages and the amount of
damages was not sufficiently “measurable or calculable” under Utah law,
prejudgment interest was not appropriate.
www.dunnington.com
Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2011 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here
No comments:
Post a Comment