The history of copyright can be traced back to 1710 when British printers demanded intellectual rights. In the 19th century, copyright and thinking about copyright changed drastically. Patterson is credited for having laid out the history of copyright, how it was interpreted in the 19th century through his seven rules and principles. In the twentieth century, copyright thinking took a different turn where firms tried to protect all their products. Towards the end of the twentieth century, copyrighting became so important that firms and individuals started taking copyright for even little details like sound, smell, and shapes.
Case Brief: Leigh, v. Warner Brothers
- The case came about because of an appeal by the United States District Court following the alleged infringement of the copyright and trademark laws. The court was expected to rule whether the images used by Warner Brothers were substantially similar to those of Leigh. The complainant, Leigh, argued that the images and other literal works that Warner Brothers Film Production utilized in producing one of the best movies were similar to the ones contained in his best-selling novel, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil.
- The court correctly ascertained that the images that Werner Brothers utilized were not similar in any way to the images used on the cover page of the novel.
- Even though Leigh quoted Lanham Act, it was established that no substantial evidence existed to prove that the use of the photograph infringed on the trademark rights.
- Leigh was of the view that the court failed to conduct further studies to establish whether his trademark rights had been violated. Additional investigations would not prove the similarity between the two photographs.
Kisch, Plaintiff, V. Ammirati & Puris Inc
- The complainant, Kisch, demanded compensation by alleging that his rights had been violated following the use of photography in advertising certain products. The plaintiff noted that laws related to Lanham Trademark Act had been violated since another person’s photography had been employed in promoting the products of a different company unfairly.
- The defendant advanced claims that no substantial similarities between photos used in the advert and the one belonging to the plaintiff.
- The defendant admitted using the plaintiff’s photo
- The court established that the accused used the plaintiff’s photo without consent, which amounts to a violation of the copyright and trademark laws.
Different tests that the court uses to test for substantial similarity
It is important to understand the tests that are always used to substantiate if the similarity constitutes a breach of copyright. This process is used to determine the substantial similarity of the products, which are contentious. Two tests are commonly used by the court in determining substantial similarities between two products. These are, comprehensive non-literal and fragmented literal similarity tests.
In comprehensive non-literal similarity, substantial similarity is always determined if the sequence or pattern of two works has some similarity. On the other hand, fragmented literal similarity is always determined if significant similarity takes place when fragmented elements which can be copyrighted are confirmed to have been copied from a given protected work in a way that is not permitted by the fair usage. The two tests works very closely but are different in nature. It is important to observe that fragmented literal similarity tests if there is similarity between specific elements of the two items, which may pass as an infringement of a copyright. On the other hand, comprehensive con-literal similarity looks at various elements, which defines a pattern or a sequence of a product.
Given the difference in the two tests, it is possible to have a scenario where outcomes of a case might be different for the same set of facts if the different tests were used. For instance, when the court decides to use fragmented literal similarity, it will not consider any similarities in the pattern of the products presented before them. This means that the focus under this test will be to identify similarity of the elements that the owner claims to have been infringed. In this case, if the court does not find any substantial similarity of the two products presented, the case will be dismissed and the accused shall be considered to have won the case even if there is a similarity of pattern in the two products. On the other hand, if the same case is to be determined using comprehensive non-literal similarity test, the plaintiff will win the case if the court is able to substantiate that there is a similarity in the pattern of two products. This means that there is a possibility that when dealing with the same case, a jury can come up with two different decisions if the two tests are used differently. This may explain why a similar case may have two different verdicts when presented to court. This may prompt a firm to appeal against a decision of the court and probably win the case in the second round. In these cases, when one firm wins a case in the first round, the other wins the second round. It means that different courts have been using different tests to arrive at their verdict. This would result in different verdicts based on the test used.
Current Event
Apple vs. Samsung scorecard
The article talks about the long battle that has been in existence between Apple Inc and Samsung Corporation over the patent breach in their Smartphone models. The article notes the two companies have spent the last two years fighting very fierce battle in courts over the patent rights for this phone, and in the previous cases, Samsung won over Apple. In round one, which took place on April 2011, Apple accused Samsung of breaching patent rights by copying Apple’s iPhone and iPad models. However, Samsung was not able to defend itself appropriately in court and the case went in favor Apple. The Jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $ 450 for damages caused by the infringement. However, both sides were not pleased with the ruling. Apple wanted the court to ban sale of Samsung’s Smartphone, which the court failed to do. Samsung on the other hand appealed against the fine imposed on it by the courts. Both firms appealed this ruling. However, on August 2012, the case went in favor of Apple, because it was awarded the fine, but did not succeed to convince the jury to stop Samsung Smartphone sales in the United States.
In June 2011, Samsung took Apple to court claiming that Apple’s iPhone 4 and iPad 2 was in breach of Samsung’s patent rights. The ruling was finally made in June 2013 in favor of Samsung. International Trade Commission barred Samsung from selling these two products within the United States markets. Apple was not pleased by this ruling, but did not consider appealing against it. Instead, it has decided to take Samsung to court over some of the recent products of Samsung. Apple has filed another case against a series of Samsung’s products and the ruling is set to be made on March 2014. The products Apple filed as those that Samsung had breached patent right on were so many that the court refused to accept some.