Copyright Infringement -
[1]
Elements and Case Citations
(1) Plaintiff owns the copyright;
(2) Plaintiff’s copyright is valid; and
(3) Defendant copied the copyrighted work without authorization.
____________________________________
Florida Federal Courts
Eleventh Circuit: BUC Int'l Corp. v. Int'l Yacht Council Ltd., 489 F.3d 1129, 1142 (11th Cir. 2007)
Southern District: C.B. Fleet Co., Inc. v. Unico Holdings, Inc., 510 F. Supp. 2d 1078, 1081 (S.D. Fla. 2007)
Middle District: Tingley Sys., Inc. v. HealthLink, Inc., 509 F. Supp. 2d 1209, 1217 (M.D. Fla. 2007)
[2] Defenses to Claim for Copyright Infringement
(1) Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110(d) (pleading affirmative defenses), and other standard defenses. See § 56.
(2) Statute of Limitations: § 95.11(3)(p), Fla. Stat. (four years); see Ambrit, Inc. v. Kraft, Inc., 812 F.2d 1531, 1546 (11th Cir. 1986).
(3) The Copyright Act of 1976 (17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) serves as federal preemption of all state common law and statutory causes of action that fall within the scope of the Act. 17 U.S.C. § 301(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b); see also State Dept. of Health and Rehab. Servs. v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377, 1379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), Gulfstream Park Racing Assn. v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc., 294 F.Supp.2d 1291, 1303 (M.D. Fla. 2003).
(4) The fair use defense provides an exception to copyright protection in specific useful circumstances, such as academia and news reporting, provided that copying and distribution is limited. See Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Frena, 839 F. Supp. 1552, 1557 (M.D. Fla. 1993).
(5) A defendant that does not qualify as an author under the work-for-hire requirement of the Copyright Act of 1976 (see 17 U.S.C. § 201) is not the owner of a copyright. See M.G.B. Homes, Inc. v. Ameron Homes, Inc., 903 F.2d 1486, 1490 (11th Cir. 1990).
