tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post8613232305006509866..comments2024-03-15T11:42:21.265-04:00Comments on The Patry Copyright Blog: Civil Conspiracy to Commit Copyright InfringementWilliam Patryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-35575684831334624972007-08-16T23:21:00.000-04:002007-08-16T23:21:00.000-04:00Not sure that's right. Note that the court explic...Not sure that's right. Note that the court explicitly disclaimed that it was recognizing a separate claim -- only a "legal doctrine that imposes liability on persons who, although not actually committing a tort themselves, share with the immediate tortfeasors a common plan or design in its preparation." IOW, another basis for joint and several liability -- which of course is all that Grokster does.<BR/><BR/>If I'm wrong, and the court does intend to read this newfound conspiracy theory to provide any monetary relief greater than that provided by federal law, methinks it's almost certainly preempted. As stated, however, it just seems to reprise Grokster in a rather clumsy fashion.<BR/><BR/>LKB in HoustonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-36008244140856657072007-08-16T13:15:00.000-04:002007-08-16T13:15:00.000-04:00Thanks, LKB; except if plaintiff can satisfy the c...Thanks, LKB; except if plaintiff can satisfy the court the case goes forward as what should be a preempted state claim with who knows what damages.William Patryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-52020632073149301392007-08-16T12:15:00.000-04:002007-08-16T12:15:00.000-04:00As articulated by the court, if the elements of co...As articulated by the court, if the elements of conspiracy are satisfied, then you have not only knowledge but also primary infringement by someone ("all elements of the underlying tort must also be satisfied") and assistance / inducements / etc. ("wrongful conduct in furtherance of the conspiracy"). That would all seem to add up to a Grokster claim, and thus I think the court's analysis is superfluous.<BR/><BR/>If, however, the court was attempting to expand things so as to cover "attempted" infringement, then I agree that such a claim would be improperly trying to expand a federal claim via state law and would thus probably be preempted. However, if you take the court at its word, this isn't the case. If "all the elements of the underlying tort must be satisfied," then we're dealing not with attempted infringement -- we're presented with actual, completed infringement.<BR/><BR/>I agree it's a fairly silly decision. However, given that it's duplicative of Grokster, it's probably immaterial.<BR/><BR/>LKB in HoustonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-8438599243210400752007-08-15T17:27:00.000-04:002007-08-15T17:27:00.000-04:00The knowledge part of contributory infringement wo...The knowledge part of contributory infringement would be sastified, obviously, but perhaps because this was on a pleadings motion, the facts on what other conduct was engaged in was slim indeed.William Patryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-29290425720757979192007-08-15T16:25:00.000-04:002007-08-15T16:25:00.000-04:00Assuming that plaintiff can prove all of the eleme...Assuming that plaintiff can prove all of the elements stated, wouldn't it also have established inducement per Grokster? Seems to me that it would be easier to prove Grokster inducement / contributory infringement than conspiracy.<BR/><BR/>LKB in HoustonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-39468132726809568932007-08-15T09:15:00.000-04:002007-08-15T09:15:00.000-04:00Conspiracy in this civil context is probably being...Conspiracy in this civil context is probably being treated much like "attempt." Attempt is not an independent cause of action, but instead has to be pled as a basis of liability for some underlying actus reus.<BR/><BR/>Using this analogy, your preemption argument makes a lot of sense. If a state court could create a tort of "attempted" civil copyright infringement, that seems to be a textbook example of a section 301 preemption.<BR/><BR/>dougAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-7470647618412898122007-08-15T09:12:00.000-04:002007-08-15T09:12:00.000-04:00If copying of published works was considered munda...If copying of published works was considered mundane and ordinary, the law would be far simpler, and pirates could come home to port from the high seas to stand as equals alongside merchants stripped of their unethical privileges.Crosbie Fitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06554471152790988479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-85662465305953450722007-08-15T08:31:00.000-04:002007-08-15T08:31:00.000-04:00Crosbie, this is far more mundane, just ordinary c...Crosbie, this is far more mundane, just ordinary copying.William Patryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-68833512346173827042007-08-15T08:04:00.000-04:002007-08-15T08:04:00.000-04:00Did you say "Civil conspiracy to commit terrorism?...Did you say "Civil conspiracy to commit terrorism?"<BR/><BR/>I can tell they're getting rooms ready in Guantanamo for those who incite or exhort civil disobedience of copyright, e.g. "Everyone should take movie cameras into cinemas as a protest".<BR/><BR/>And it won't be long thereafter when those publicly arguing and campaigning for copyright's abolition will also be rounded up for 're-education'.<BR/><BR/>I've got my handbasket ready.Crosbie Fitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06554471152790988479noreply@blogger.com