In a recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the court decided that the anti-plagiarism service provided by iParadigms at turnitin.com, did not constitute copyright infringement of high school students' papers submitted via the service.  Instead, the court held the service was a fair use of the copyrighted works and therefore not infringement under § 107.  However, the court reversed and remanded to a district court on the issue against a student for liability under the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act for allegedly unauthorized access to its servers based on one student's use of a password meant for students from another school obtained via the internet.

More on A.V. v. iParadigms, LLC after the jump.

[More]

In a decision last week, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a district court decision granting summary judgment in a copyright infringement action.  The central disagreement between the parties was over the scope of copyright protection in a book about sales techniques.  The district court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding fair use and laches precluded recovery.  

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed in the district court's decision as to whether instructional courses constituted derivative works.  However, the court vacated and remanded in part the district court's application of the fair use doctrine and laches.  Regarding laches, the court held, as a matter of first impression in the circuit, that laches may be raised as a defense in a copyright infringement action, even when the statute of limitations has not yet run.  However the court stated there is a "strong presumption" against laches when a claim is filed within the limitations period, only applying in "the most extraordinary circumstances."

Regarding fair use, the court criticized the district court's use of a so-called fifth fair use factor, specifically the consent of the copyright owner.  The court stated analyzing consent in the context of fair use was "incorrect, both in terms of logic and precedent," because "the existence of actual consent negates the necessity of conducting a fair use analysis in the first place."  Ultimately, there were sufficient questions of fact for one of the plaintiff's four claims to survive summary judgment, and the court remanded that claim for further consideration.

More on Peter Letterese & Assocs., Inc. v. World Institute of Scientology Enters. after the jump.

[More]

In a decision yesterday, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's dismissal of a complaint for declaratory judgment by a karaoke device manufacturer without leave to amend for failure to state a claim.  The complaint sought a declaration that a compulsory license under § 115 of the Copyright Act was a sufficient license for a karaoke device to not only play music, but also display the lyrics in real time in coordination with the music.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, finding that the § 115 license was insufficient.  The § 115 license applies to "phonorecords," but karaoke, because of the lyrics and other content displayed in connection with the song, is an "audiovisual work," specifically excluded from the definition of phonorecords.  The court also held that the use of the lyrics also could not constitute fair use based on its commercial nature, aggreeing with a Sixth Circuit decision (blogged here).

More details of Leadsinger, Inc. v. BMG Music Publ'g after the jump.

[More]

In a decision today, the Sixth Circuit affirmed an award of $806,000 in statutory damages plus attorney fees in a copyright case.  The case was brought by a copyright holder against a manufacturer of karaoke discs incorporating the compositions to which the plaintiffs held the copyright.

The court upheld the award and finding of willful infringement over the defendant's challenges under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Eighth Amendment, as well as its contention that it was engaged in fair use.

More details of Zomba Enters., Inc. v. Panorama Records, Inc. after the jump.

[More]

In a lengthy and tech-heavy opinion [Update (12/4): the court has released an amended opinion, available here], the Ninth Circuit this week reversed a preliminary injunction against Google restricting its image search from displaying thumbnails of images copyrighted by Perfect 10, Inc.  There are several aspects of the ruling of interest, such as:

• Holding that Perfect 10 failed to show Google would not likely prevail on its fair use defense based on its display of copyrighted thumbnail images.  At the preliminary injunction stage, this places the burden on the copyright holder to disprove fair use, instead of the reverse at trial.
  
• Affirming that Google was not directly liable for providing links to sites displaying the full copyrighted images
• Remanding the issue of contributory infringement, because there was a factual dispute as to whether Google knew of the infringement, and whether there were "reasonable and feasible means for Google to refrain from providing access to infringing
  images"

The determination on remand of the contributory infringement claims (assuming they do not settle) will likely provide useful guidance for the potential liability of search engines for copyright infringement on the Internet.

Click below for other media and blog coverage of the decision.

Media: 

Law.com (a second article)

Washington Post

Associated Press (via Forbes)

Reuters

Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)

Blogs:

Eric Goldman

John Ottaviani

EFF deep links (the EFF also has many of the court documents available here)

How appealing

43(b)log