Showing posts with label prejudgment interest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prejudgment interest. Show all posts

Friday, August 02, 2013

Copyright Law - Federal Circuit: Reasonable Royalty For Infringing A Sculpture?

Sculpture, Copyright Infringement, Damages, Hypothetical License, Royalties as Damages, Prejudgment Interest

Gaylord v. United States, 678 F.3d 1339 (Federal Circuit May 14, 2012).  Sculptor won judgment against U.S. Postal Service for copyright infringement for issuing postage stamp depicting soldier sculptures installed in Korean War Veterans Memorial.  The Court of Federal Claims awarded sculptor $5,000 in damages and denied prejudgment interest. Sculptor appealed to Federal Circuit.  The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded holding that damages award based only on what Post Office had paid in the past as a license fee was not proper measure of fair market value and that prejudgment interest was available as a matter of law.   The lower court had used a “zone of reasonableness” test for determining the appropriate license fee and accepted the Post Office’s testimony that it had paid from $1,500 to $5,000 in the past as lump sums.  The Federal Circuit found this testimony to be self-serving.  The Federal Circuit looked to reasonable royalties and hypothetical licenses as a more appropriate measure, noting that the Post Office itself re-licensed the infringed images at a royalty of 8% and noted the sculptor’s past history of licensing images at that rate.  The Federal Circuit noted that the lower court erred in only analyzing one side of the negotiating table in determining fair license fees.
www.dunnington.com
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2012-2013 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Sunday, July 07, 2013

Copyright Law - Tenth Circuit: Is It Infringement To Repair Hardware That Includes Copyrighted Software?

Breach of Contract, Contractual Damages, Conversion, Post-Contract Damages From Conversion, Preemption of Utah Theft Statute by the Copyright Act, Jury Instructions, Verdict Forms, Expert Testimony, Prejudgment Interest

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 Appx. 689 (10th Cir. February 7, 2012)(unpublished).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  

Sunday, May 16, 2010

Graham v. Haughey: Prejudgment Interest Granted on Old "Secret" Infringements

What happens when you in 2005 for infringements that you didn't know about running from 1992 through 2004? Usually, the three-year statute of limitations of the Copyright Act will preclude you from a remedy.  17 USC 507(b).  But what if the infringements were secret and concealed from you as a trade secret?

I wrote about the Graham v Haughey case here . End result, infringer whacked for 20 million clams.

But do you get prejudgment interest? Another $4.2 million smackers, the May 12 decision below.  The $20 million judgment below that.

Graham v Haughey - Prejudgment Interest Granted on Old "Secret" Infringements