They’re at it again on that map, this time with competing SJ motions on the copyright and DMCA causes of action.
This case gets into the interplay between summary judgment motions and affidavits alleged to be “sham.”
No, seriously there are competing Christmas caroling companies. With copyrights and everything.
The issue was whether the defendant owned a half interest in the rights to the “Ohio Players” catalog purchased at a sheriff’s auction.
Same case – different order. This time it’s the defendants seeking SJ on damages issues. Didn’t go well.
The defendant dropped two of the challenged defenses, but the plaintiff had no luck striking the rest of these “affirmative defenses.”
The plaintiff accused an employee of the defendant of burning down his warehouse, and the defendant moved for SJ on liability. Then did it again on standing and damages.
Thanks for playing anyway.
Yeah, I didn’t think so. But the opinion is still a useful guide to infringement and how genuine issues of material fact work.
Exceptions to the default order of things are always interesting, aren’t they?