Beckett v. Urban et al., No. 15-cv-1407 (C.D. Cal. dated July 6, 2015).
A trademark infringment and dilution claim against country music star Keith Urban, concerning the mark PLAYER, was dismissed on the pleadings. The Court found that plaintiff’s mark of “PLAYER” and Defendant s’ mark “Player by Keith Urban” are not sufficiently similar. Defendants use of the phras e “by Keith Urban” clearly denotes that Keith Urban is the good’s source, dispelling any potenti al confusion with Plaintiff’s band “PLAYER.” Further, the Court found that Plaintiff’s and Defendants’ goods and servicees are not closely re lated. Plaintiff’s trademark is for audio and video recordings featuring music and artistic performances by a rock band and for entertainment services in the nature of live audio performances by a rock band. Defendants are marketing a guitar and guitar lesson kit complete with audio a nd video recordings that teaches a consumer to use and play guitar. As to the dilution claim, Plaintiff failed to allege that his mark is sufficiently famous.
Showing posts with label Country Music. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Country Music. Show all posts
July 9, 2015
June 23, 2014
Workshop Agreement Does Not Permit Attorneys Fees Or Indemnification
Bowen v. Paisley, No. 3:13-cv-0414 (M.D. Tenn. June 16, 2014).
The Court held that defendant's counterclaims for breach of contract would proceed, but their counterclaims for indemnification and attorney's fees would be dismissed. Plaintiff wrote and recorded a song and alleged that two popular country music artists (Brad Paisley and Carrie Underwood) violated her copyright interests. Plaintiff alleged that defendants gained access to her song when she performed it during a 2008 country music songwriting workshop in Nashville, in which two other defendants served as guest instructors. Those defendants alleged that s a condition of participation in the workshop, plaintiff signed a consent agreement, in which the plaintiff effectively waived her right to bring the copyright claims asserted, at least as they related to access gained in the workshop. First, the Court found that the defendants could not assert contractual indemnification under the agreement because it would lead to an "absurd result" of requiring plaintiff to defend the defendants against her own claims. Second, the Court held that it would permit the defendant's breach of contract claim -- based on a covenant not to sue provision -- to remain, but recognized that the claim would eventually lead to "a doctrinal thicket" as to its viability. Lastly, the Court held that the attorneys fees claim failed under the language of the contract.
The Court held that defendant's counterclaims for breach of contract would proceed, but their counterclaims for indemnification and attorney's fees would be dismissed. Plaintiff wrote and recorded a song and alleged that two popular country music artists (Brad Paisley and Carrie Underwood) violated her copyright interests. Plaintiff alleged that defendants gained access to her song when she performed it during a 2008 country music songwriting workshop in Nashville, in which two other defendants served as guest instructors. Those defendants alleged that s a condition of participation in the workshop, plaintiff signed a consent agreement, in which the plaintiff effectively waived her right to bring the copyright claims asserted, at least as they related to access gained in the workshop. First, the Court found that the defendants could not assert contractual indemnification under the agreement because it would lead to an "absurd result" of requiring plaintiff to defend the defendants against her own claims. Second, the Court held that it would permit the defendant's breach of contract claim -- based on a covenant not to sue provision -- to remain, but recognized that the claim would eventually lead to "a doctrinal thicket" as to its viability. Lastly, the Court held that the attorneys fees claim failed under the language of the contract.
December 4, 2013
Country Music Infringement Claim Survives Dismissal
Bowen v. Paisley et al., No. 3:13-cv-0414 (M.D. Tenn. filed Dec. 3, 2013) [Doc. 58]
Plaintiff alleged that the defendants, including popular country music singers Brad Paisley and Carrie
Underwood, violated her copyright interests in the song “Remind Me,” a song that plaintiff
copyrighted and recorded. Defendants moved to dismiss. The Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, finding that under the Iqbal standard, plaintiff had plausibly shown that, taken in combination, her lyrics and associated melodies, intonations, and usage could be sufficiently original to constitute protectable material, and that based on the Court's own comparison of the two works that defendants' hooks which incorporate that potentially distinctive combination of elements, are “substantially similar”.
Plaintiff alleged that the defendants, including popular country music singers Brad Paisley and Carrie
Underwood, violated her copyright interests in the song “Remind Me,” a song that plaintiff
copyrighted and recorded. Defendants moved to dismiss. The Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, finding that under the Iqbal standard, plaintiff had plausibly shown that, taken in combination, her lyrics and associated melodies, intonations, and usage could be sufficiently original to constitute protectable material, and that based on the Court's own comparison of the two works that defendants' hooks which incorporate that potentially distinctive combination of elements, are “substantially similar”.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
