Intellectual Property Law

Sixth Circuit: Partial fees to copyright defendant affirmed given plaintiff's litigation tactics

By McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.

In a decision last week, the Sixth Circuit affirmed an award of partial attorney fees to a defendant in a copyright case.  The plaintiff sued multiple defendants, alleging copyright infringement under numerous theories.  One such theory was that receipt of royalties from the sale of infringing music rendered a party liable for the underlying infringement.  This theory was rejected by the court when it granted summary judgment in favor of some of the defendants.  Even though it had been rejected, the plaintiff continued to pursue the theory in this case against the remaining defendant.  When the last defendant prevailed on summary judgment, the district court awarded the defendant its attorney fees incurred after the first summary judgment decision.  

In a previous appeal, the Sixth Circuit vacated the award, noting that the theory of recovery did not become objectively unreasonable by virtue of the decision regarding the other defendants' summary judgment motion, and remanded the issue for redetermination in light of additional factors.  On remand, the district court awarded the same amount, noting the plaintiff's overly aggressive litigation tactics.  Such tactics included needlessly requiring the defendant to prepare for an unnecessary trial (rather than stipulating to the same decision regarding the "royalty receipt" theory of recovery and addressing the issue on appeal), filing a single complaint over 900 pages long with hundreds of separate claims and defendants, engaging in discovery abuses, abusing the summary judgment process by submitting massive statements of disputed facts which included legal conclusions and immaterial and argumentative assertions, and engaging in sharp pre-trial practices.  The court also sought to deter the plaintiff from similar litigation tactics, given the plaintiff's pattern of litigation.

The Sixth Circuit affirmed.  The court noted that while the "royalty receipt" theory of liability had been rejected by the court, it was not objectively unreasonable.  However, the district court's assessment of the various factors was not an abuse of discretion, and the court therefore affirmed the award.

More detail of Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. WB Music Corp. after the jump.

[More]

Full post as published by FileWrapper on April 01, 2008 (boomark / email).