-
Alfred Bell & Co. v. Catalda Fine Arts 191 F. 2d 99 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1951
"Original" in reference to a copyrighted work means that the particular work "owes its origin" to the "author." No large measure of novelty is necessary.
We (the court) consider untenable defendants' suggestion that plaintiff's mezzotints could not validly be copyrighted because they are reproductions of
works in the public domain. For a copyright confers the exclusive right to copy the copyrighted work - a right not to have others copy it. Nor were the
copyrights lost because of the reproduction of the mezzotints in catalogues.
[+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
Briddle v. Scott 63 F. 3d 364 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, 1995
CRIMINAL CASE
[+"on selvage" search]
-
Concord Fabrics, Inc. v. Generation Mills, Inc. 328 F. Supp. 1030, 169 USPQ 470 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1971
Plaintiff Concord Fabrics, Inc., seeks a preliminary injunction against alleged infringement by defendant, Generation Mills, Inc., of a copyrighted fabric design.
In conclusion: plaintiff's proper claim to originality is an extremely limited one. In this context, defendant's variations are significant, and it has not infringed
the "claimed originality and the distinctive features of plaintiff's [design]," Millworth Converting Corporation v. Slifka, supra, 276 F.2d at 445.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
CORTLEY FABRICS COMPANY v. Slifka 175 F. Supp. 66 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1959
This is an application for a preliminary injunction, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C., enjoining the defendants from alleged
infringement of a copyrighted reproduction of a work of art on fabric
The motion for a preliminary injunction is granted.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"on selvage" search]
-
Couleur International Ltd. v. Opulent Fabrics Inc. 330 F. Supp. 152 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1971
Plaintiff has moved by order to show cause for a preliminary injunction against defendants' alleged infringement of a copyrighted fabric design. A temporary
restraining order, issued by Judge McLean on January 6, 1971, after adversary submissions, has remained in effect until now. For the reasons given below,
the motion for a preliminary injunction will be granted.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Deltak, Inc. v. Advanced Systems, Inc. 574 F. Supp. 400 - Dist. Court, ND Illinois, 1983
Deltak and ASI are two of the three largest firms in the business of selling video and audio tapes and textbooks used to teach data processing.
no reference
To summarize, I find that Deltak has failed to prove damages from the infringement.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Design Options, Inc. v. BellePointe, Inc. 940 F. Supp. 86 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1996
Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action on October 3, 1994, alleging copyright infringement by BellePointe of fifteen sweater styles that had been designed
and created by Design Options and previously sold to BellePointe.
BellePointe claims that the package price it paid for each sweater represented an investment in the underlying sweater designs, which investment could not
be realized unless it had the right to copy the designs. But there is no evidence that there was anything more to the transaction between BellePointe and
Design Options than the purchase of goods for an agreed-upon price.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Design Resources, Inc. v. John Wolf Decorative Fabrics [CITATION only]
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Greeff Fabrics, Inc. v. Malden Mills Industries, Inc. 412 F. Supp. 160 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1976
However, some time prior to the fall of 1975, petitioner discovered a textile fabric called "Camelot," produced and sold by Belle Fabrics, Inc. ("Belle"),
which embodied its copyrighted "Contemplation" design. It is respondent's position that its challenged fabric design was innocently copied from a sample \
of "Camelot" fabric which bore no copyright notice.
On the present state of the record the Court is unable to make a final determination as to whether the instant situation falls within the ambit of the foregoing
limited exception to the copyright notice requirement.
[+"on selvage" search]
-
Harolds Stores, Inc. v. Dillard Department Stores 82 F. 3d 1533 - Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit, 1996
This appeal arises from a jury verdict entered in a copyright infringement action. Plaintiffs Harold's Stores, Inc. ("Harold's") and CMT Enterprises, Inc.
("CMT") filed suit against Defendant Dillard Department Stores, Inc. ("Dillard")[1] alleging that Dillard infringed Harold's copyrighted fabric designs
contained on women's garments, predominately skirts.
In sum, we hold the district court did not err by: (1) concluding that the Copyright Act did not preempt Harold's claim under the Oklahoma Antitrust Act; (2)
admitting Dr. Howard's survey; and (3) denying Dillard's renewal motion for judgment as a matter of law after trial.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Horizon Mills Corp. v. QVC, Inc. 161 F. Supp. 2d 208 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 2001
This action, filed on March 24, 2000, arises out of defendant's use of the term "Slinky" to advertise women's apparel for home shopping customers.
Plaintiff, the owner of the trademark in SLINKY for "fabrics used in clothing and household products," alleges claims for trademark infringement
Defendant moves for summary judgment as to each of plaintiff's claims on the ground that plaintiff's mark is generic.
For the foregoing reasons, QVC's motion for summary judgment is denied.
[+"trademarked fabric" search]
-
Imperial Textile Co. of NY v. Ametex Fabrics Inc. 682 F. Supp. 18 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1987
Plaintiff Imperial Textile Company of New York, Inc., a converter of textiles, seeks a preliminary injunction against Ametex Fabrics Inc., another textile
converter, based on Ametex's alleged infringement of Imperial's copyrighted fabric design.
Accordingly, Imperial's preliminary injunction restraining defendant's continued sale of its infringing fabric design in whatever color combinations is granted.
Plaintiff has demonstrated both a likelihood of success on the merits, see supra, and possible irreparable injury.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Jack Winter, Inc. v. Koratron Company, Inc. 375 F. Supp. 1 - Dist. Court, ND California, 1974
Koratron seeks to recover from certain garment makers license royalties for the use of the patented process or damages for infringement of the patent after
expiration of their respective licenses.
PATENT CASE
[+"licensed fabric" search], [+"trademarked fabric" search], [+"trademarked fabrics" search]
-
JBJ Fabrics, Inc. v. Brylane, Inc. 714 F. Supp. 107 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1989
Plaintiff JBJ Fabrics, Inc. ("JBJ") brings this action for copyright infringement pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 101 (1982) alleging that defendant Brylane Inc.
("Brylane") manufactured and sold garments imprinted with plaintiff's copyrighted design. Defendant moves for summary judgment on the ground that
this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiff does not hold a valid copyright. For the reasons that follow, defendant's motion is denied.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Kenbrooke Fabrics, Inc. v. Soho Fashions, Inc. 690 F. Supp. 298 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1988
On January 23, 1979 Soptra Fabrics, Inc. ("Soptra"), not a party to this action, was granted Certificate of Copyright Registration,
No. VA 17-255 for a fabric design then known as Pattern No. 10220, now known as No. 1779.
For the reasons set forth above, defendant's motion for summary judgment and for attorneys' fees is denied.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Key West Hand Print Fabrics, Inc. v. Serbin, Inc. 244 F. Supp. 287 - Dist. Court, SD Florida, 1965
Thereafter, the infringing fabric designs were made for defendant by C. and J. Ryan Co., a manufacturing establishment operated by the brothers
of the defendant's designer. Actually, the defendant had no artists who created fabric designs. It selected fabrics from others for the manufacture of its dresses.
It follows that Counts One and Four of the Complaint should be dismissed; that plaintiff is entitled to an injunction restraining and enjoining the
defendant from directly or indirectly infringing copyrights No. K67524 and No. K66990 by either making or causing to be made, selling or causing to be sold,
copies of these copyrights.
I therefore find that the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages from the defendant under the statute in the sum of $5,000.00 for infringing plaintiff's
copyright K67524 (Zuzek Rose Butter) and $5,000.00 for infringing plaintiff's copyright K66990 (Dragon), or a total of $10,000.00.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
Key West Hand Print Fabrics, Inc. v. Serbin, Inc. 269 F. Supp. 605 - Dist. Court, SD Florida, 1966
Thereafter, the infringing fabric designs were made for defendant by C. and J. Ryan Co., a manufacturing establishment operated by the brothers
of the defendant's designer. Actually, the defendant had no artists who created fabric designs. It selected fabrics from others for the manufacture of its dresses.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"on selvage" search]
-
Kirk-Brummel Associates, Inc. v. dePoortere Corp. 203 USPQ 940 - 1979 [CITATION only]
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
KIS, SA v. Foto Fantasy, Inc. 204 F. Supp. 2d 968 - Dist. Court, ND Texas, 2001
Plaintiffs' Lanham Act claim stems from Defendants' use of drawings of Tom Cruise and Marilyn Monroe on the outside of their photo booths.
Defendants and Plaintiffs both own photo booths that are placed inside malls around the country
reference to "Dillars's"
In conclusion, the Court finds that Defendants' criticism of Dr. Howard's survey methodology, although it may be persuasive, goes only to the weight,
and not the admissibility, of the evidence. Therefore, Defendants' Motion to Strike Dr. Howard's expert report and trial testimony is DENIED.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Koratron Co., Inc. v. Lion Uniform, Inc.409 F. Supp. 1019 - Dist. Court, ND California, 1976
This suit for patent infringement was brought by plaintiff Koratron Company, Inc. (Koratron), against defendant Lion Uniform, Inc. (Lion).
PATENT CASE
[+"trademarked fabric" search]
-
Landsberg v. Scrabble Crossword Game Players, Inc. 736 F. 2d 485 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1984
no references to copyrighted fabric
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Langman Fabrics v. Samsung America, Inc. 967 F. Supp. 131, 43 USPQ 2d 1534 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1997
This copyright infringement case involves the alleged copying by defendants of plaintiff's copyrighted fabric design. Both the plaintiff and the defendants
moved for summary judgment. Because the plaintiff does not hold the copyright in the fabric design, or in the alternative because its copyright notice was
defective, defendants' motion for summary judgment must be granted and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment denied.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Lauratex Textile Corp. v. Allton Knitting Mills 519 F. Supp. 730 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1981
The plaintiff accuses the defendants Allton Knitting Mills, Inc. ... of duplicating a fabric design which plaintiff had created, copyrighted and successfully sold
in the market. The defendants allegedly sold this copied version to several of plaintiff's customers at a lower price.
Regardless of where the defendant claims he actually obtained the pattern, it is clear that the plaintiff had a valid copyright on the design, that the defendants
had a reasonable opportunity to copy that design since January, 1980 when plaintiff first sold it, and that the defendants produced an identical design thereafter.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
LEON B. ROSENBLATT TEX. LTD. v. M. Lowenstein & Sons, Inc. 321 F. Supp. 186 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1970
For purposes of this motion at least defendant's papers herein no where contest the originality of plaintiff's design, the issuance of a copyright to plaintiff,
or the allegation that defendant's design infringes that copyright.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, plaintiff's application is granted.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
Lever Bros. Co. v. PROCTER & GAMBLE DISTRIBUTING 668 F. Supp. 924, 5 USPQ 2d 1239 - Dist. Court, D. New Jersey, 1987
Presumably, however, the Gaiser and Morton patents cover different inventions and a Gaiser/McQueary-licensed fabric softener could be manufactured
that would steer clear of the Morton inventions.
PATENT CASE
[+"licensed fabric" search]
-
LIBERTAS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. CHERRYHILL MANAGEMENT, INC. Dist. Court, SD Ohio, 2012
software case, no references to copyrighted fabric
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Lida, Inc. v. Texollini, Inc. 768 F. Supp. 439 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1991
Subsequently, garments made with a design almost identical to the Michelangelo design and manufactured by Texollini, appeared in stores under
B.B. Blu's label. Texollini's rendition sold in the marketplace at a price substantially lower than that charged for Lida's Michelangelo.
For the foregoing reasons, the preliminary injunction shall issue and B.B. Blu will be required to supply, within ten days of the date hereof, a list of its customers to Lida.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Millworth Converting Corporation v. Slifka 180 F. Supp. 840 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1960
The result was that a design which was made by embroidery, and which was not copyrighted, was photographed and then transferred by the engraver or
printing establishment into a printed form on the materials prepared by the plaintiff.
Thereafter defendants have been manufacturing and distributing another grade of cloth on which they have, in effect, copied plaintiff's reproduction of the
copyrighted design. The copies submitted are so substantially the same in appearance that it is virtually impossible to distinguish one from the other,
although there may be slight variations which could be ascertained by a minute examination of the particular designs.
The Court concludes that the copyrights are valid and that they are being infringed by the defendants, which is sufficient basis to require that a preliminary injunction issue.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Millworth Converting Corporation v. Slifka 276 F. 2d 443 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1960
As in Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp., 2 Cir., 274 F.2d 487, these appeals from orders granting temporary injunctions bring before us
questions arising from the use of copyright to protect fabric designs.
For here, in contrast, the basic design was in the public domain and plaintiff was entitled to relief only if defendants copied its "expression," as the
defendant in Alfred Bell v. Catalda Fine Arts, supra, was found to have done
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Mister B Textiles Inc. v. Woodcrest Fabrics, Inc. 523 F. Supp. 21 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1981
This case comes before the court on a motion by plaintiff, Mr. B Textiles (Mr. B), for a preliminary injunction to prevent defendant,
Woodcrest Fabrics, Inc. (Woodcrest), from selling certain fabrics which allegedly infringe on copyrighted fabrics manufactured by plaintiff.
Therefore, as provided in the order filed simultaneously herewith, the temporary restraining orders issued by this court on October 23, 1980,
and November 26, 1980, against defendants Woodcrest and Cobina, respectively, are hereby extended as preliminary injunctions.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
Myers v. Waverly Fabrics, Div. of F. Schumacher & Co. 101 AD 2d 777, 475 NYS 2d 860 - NY: Appellate Div., 1st Dept., 1984
The complaint herein alleges that plaintiff sold the right to defendant to reproduce a design "solely on fabric" (and on wallpaper, as now conceded by
plaintiff), and that in granting licenses to others to reproduce the design on other than fabric, defendants acted "in direct contravention of the terms of the
agreement between plaintiff and defendant".
Accordingly, the order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.), entered May 13, 1983, denying summary judgment to the
defendant, should be affirmed.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
National Basketball Ass'n v. Sports Team Analysis 931 F. Supp. 1124 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1996
As set forth in detail below, I find that through the SportsTrax product, defendants disseminated to NBA fans game information on a real-time basis
For the foregoing reasons, I hold that defendants' conduct in connection with SportsTrax constitutes commercial misappropriation and that plaintiffs
are entitled to permanent injunctive relief to remedy defendants' ongoing unlawful conduct.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
NAT. BASKETBALL ASS'N v. Sports Team Analysis 939 F. Supp. 1071 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1996
no references to copyrighted fabric
For the foregoing reasons, I hold that defendants' conduct in connection with SportsTrax and Stats' AOL site constitutes commercial misappropriation
and that plaintiffs are entitled to permanent injunctive relief to remedy defendants' ongoing unlawful conduct
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Novelty Textile Mills v. Joan Fabrics Corp. 558 F. 2d 1090 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1977
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court for the Southern District of New York (Werker, D. J.) denying plaintiff's motion for a preliminary
injunction against the continued use by defendant of a fabric design which it allegedly copied from plaintiff's fabric design. The complaint charges
copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 112 and 116 and seeks a permanent injunction, impoundment and destruction of the allegedly infringing
copies, and damages. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
I would rule now that, except for the "Fleetwood Spice" and "Sand" designs, there was no infringement of Novelty's 253 and to that extent affirm the
decision of the district court.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Acadia Company 173 F. Supp. 292 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1959
Plaintiffs, Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. and Henry Glass & Co. (hereinafter "Peter Pan" and "Glass," respectively), have moved for a preliminary injunction.
Plaintiffs allege that original works of art entitled Style 680, Range 1, Byzantium (hereinafter "Byzantium"), and Style 680, Range 11, Grecian Glory
(hereinafter "Grecian Glory"), were created by Pierre Kittler Studio in Paris, France; that the original designs were sold to Peter Pan; that these original
works of art were reproduced as a design for textiles, and as such were submitted after satisfying all the requirements of the Copyright Laws
(Act of July 30, 1947, c. 391, sec. 1; 61 Stat. 652; 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 1-32); and that a certificate of copyright was duly issued to Peter Pan for Byzantium
(Certificate No. H 7290, dated July 9, 1958) and for Grecian Glory (Certificate No. H 7218, dated July 9, 1958).
Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against both defendants.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Dixon Textile Corporation 188 F. Supp. 235 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1960
The court in the Martin Weiner Corp. case, Hand, Circuit Judge, stated that "the absence of `notice' is a defence that the copyist must prove,
and that the burden is on him to show that `notice' could have been embodied in the design without impairing its market value."
Since it is now established that the defendant deliberately copied plaintiffs' copyrighted design and the notice of copyright was adequate, plaintiffs
are entitled to a permanent injunction regardless of the alleged lack of knowledge of the copyright by the defendant at the time of the initial infringement.
[+"on selvage" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. 274 F. 2d 487 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1960
This is an appeal from a preliminary injunction, granted by Judge Herlands, forbidding the defendant to copy an ornamental design, printed upon cloth.
Whatever may be shown at the trial, upon this record we hold that the "design" should be protected, pendente lite. Order affirmed.
[+"copyrighted fabrics" search], [+"on selvage" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Puritan Dress Co. Inc. 207 F. Supp. 563, 133 USPQ 678 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1962
In these cases the plaintiff claimed infringement of its Byzantium design by Martin Weiner Corporation, the manufacturer of the fabric which was copied
from the design, and various dress manufacturers who purchased the copied fabric manufactured by Weiner, and sold dresses made of that fabric.
Judgment will be entered in favor of plaintiffs and against defendant accordingly.
[+"on selvage" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Jobela Fabrics, Inc. 329 F. 2d 194 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1964
Appellants [Peter Pan] brought this action for injunctive relief and for damages arising out of appellee's infringement of a textile print design for which appellants
had obtained a copyright. Appellee consented to summary judgment and a permanent injunction was entered in appellants' favor.
Reversed and remanded so that upon such remand the District Court may consider an award, if any, of such damages as to the Court shall appear to be just.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Dan River Mills, Inc. 295 F. Supp. 1366 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1969
This is an action for copyright infringement. Plaintiffs allege that defendant copied their design, known as "Style 2464, Range 11, `Daisies'," which plaintiffs
registered as a reproduction of a work of art[1] and for which the Copyright Office issued Copyright No. H-28688 on June 1, 1965.
Plaintiffs have demonstrated that their design is original and that defendant had access to their design and actually copied it
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Rosstex Fabrics, Inc. 733 F. Supp. 174 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1990
This is an action for copyright infringement. Plaintiffs allege that defendants copied their design, "Style 1403, Range 100, Patt. 14261X" for which the
Register of Copyrights issued Copyright No. VA 218-543.[1] This design is printed on fabric and sold by plaintiffs.
Defendants move under Rule 56, Fed.R. Civ.P., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiffs' copyright is invalid.
Plaintiffs cross-move for summary judgment granting them a permanent injunction against defendants and damages. For the reasons stated below,
defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied and plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment is granted.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Precious Moments, Inc. v. La Infantil, Inc.
971 F. Supp. 66 - Dist. Court, D. Puerto Rico, 1997
Defendant La Infantil, Inc., is a retail store that sells baby products, including furniture, bedding, clothes, and accessories. Some of the bedding it
sells is manufactured by Teresita Martin Sewing Service from authentic, lawfully-acquired Precious Moments fabrics.
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff Precious Moments, Inc.'s, motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 6) is hereby DENIED as to the copyright
claim and GRANTED as to the trademark and unfair competition claims to the extent set forth above. Defendant La Infantil shall modify the tags included
with products manufactured from Precious Moments fabric in accordance with this opinion.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search], [+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
Princess Fabrics, Inc. v. CHF, INC. 922 F. 2d 99 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1990
In 1987, Harold Kfare, a sales representative of third-party defendant (hereinafter "Raschel"), a manufacturer of textiles and a supplier to CHF,
purchased a piece of Princess's fabric Style M/179 from a retail store located in Flemington, New Jersey. Kfare testified that the fabric bore no
notice of copyright. Kfare took the fabric sample to CHF who, in designing its own lace curtain, made slight modifications to the pattern found in the fabric sample.
We hold that the district court did not err in finding that Princess had forfeited copyright protection through lack of notice. Nor did the court below err in
holding that Princess had failed to protect itself by taking steps to cure pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 405(a)(2).
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Segrets, Inc. v. Gillman Knitwear Co., Inc. 42 F. Supp. 2d 58 - Dist. Court, D. Massachusetts, 1998
The controversy depicted in the original complaint stems from Gillman's production and distribution of a sweater vest under the name of Christie
(the "Christie I sweater"). Thereafter, Segrets amended its complaint to allege additional counts for copyright infringement and violation of the
Lanham Act due to Gillman's production and distribution of a cardigan sweater under the name of Charro (the "Charro sweater").
Gillman's attitude that it could succeed in avoiding responsibility for its infringing conduct is further exemplified by its attempts to discourage Segrets from
proceeding forward with this lawsuit.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Selvage v. Lynaugh 842 F. 2d 89 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, 1988
CRIMINAL CASE
[+"on selvage" search]
-
Soptra Fabrics Corp. v. Stafford Knitting Mills, Inc. 365 F. Supp. 1199 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1973
Plaintiff seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction for the alleged infringement by the defendant of plaintiff's copyrighted fabric design No. 5700.
Thereafter the defendant's stylist visited the Cindy Carol factory and from there took a piece of plaintiff's No. 5700 to the Victory Design Studios
(hereinafter "Victory"). The defendant's stylist requested Oscar Hyman, one of Victory's salesmen, to prepare a design which would be competitive
with plaintiff's No. 5700 but which would not infringe on it.
Having found the defendant's design to be non-infringing, it is not necessary to rule on defendant's argument that the plaintiff's copyright itself is
invalid for lack of originality.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Stevens Linen Associates, Inc. v. Mastercraft Corp. 656 F. 2d 11 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, 1981
The district court held that defendant's fabrics "Rio Grande" and "Grand Canyon" infringed plaintiff's copyright for its Chestertown fabric, granted a
permanent injunction barring future sales of the infringing fabrics, and awarded plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees.
Finally, upon remand, the court should consider an additional award of damages based upon the Mastercraft invoices introduced by Stevens which
bear dates subsequent to the entry of the injunction.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Textile Secrets Intern., Inc. v. Ya-Ya Brand Inc. 524 F. Supp. 2d 1184 - Dist. Court, CD California, 2007
Ya-Ya created five different garment styles bearing designs similar to FEATHERS and offered them for sale for one month primarily through Ya-Ya's
showrooms in Los Angeles and New York.
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied with respect to the first and second
causes of action involving claims of copyright infringement, and granted with respect to the third cause of action alleging a violation of 17 U.S.C. § 1202.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
United Fabrics Intern., Inc. v. C&J WEAR, INC. 630 F. 3d 1255 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 2011
United's action made it as far as the summary judgment phase, at which point the district court dismissed the case sua sponte, concluding that
United lacked standing to pursue its copyright claims. The district court ruled that United failed to establish an element that is crucial to all copyright
infringement actions: ownership of a valid copyright.
United appeals the district court's order dismissing this case.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc. v. Sarne Company 278 F. Supp. 162 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1967
A comparison of the design on defendant's fabric bag with plaintiffs' "Caribe" design convinces me that the average lay observer would consider them to be
the same. Indeed, except for some minor variations in a few flower designs, the shape, size, color, arrangement and background of the flowers are so
similar that the defendant's design appears to have been copied from plaintiffs' "Caribe". As for the minor variations, "the ordinary observer, unless he set
out to detect the disparities, would be disposed to overlook them, and regard [the] aesthetic appeal as the same."
Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction is granted.
[+"on selvage" search]
-
United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc. v. Sutton 282 F. Supp. 588, 157 USPQ 487 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1967
In this action to enjoin defendants from pirating plaintiffs' designs and for damages, plaintiffs move herein to preliminarily enjoin defendants from infringing
valid copyrights, competing unfairly and from taking other related action. Plaintiffs allege that defendants, through the guise of sampling plaintiffs' original
design fabrics, have copied these designs and placed them on fabric "tote" bags manufactured in Japan which they then sold to various department
stores throughout the country.
Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion is granted only insofar as it seeks to enjoin defendants from infringing the "Bahama" and "Bramble" designs.
[+"on selvage" search]
-
United Merchants & Mfrs., Inc. v. K. Gimbel Accessories, Inc. 294 F. Supp. 151 - Dist. Court, SD New York, 1968
Plaintiff United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc. ("United"), a converter of textiles from raw uncolored fabrics into colored design-bearing finished fabrics,
and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Pattern Rights, Inc., seek a preliminary injunction restraining defendant, an importer of fabric-covered luggage from infringing
plaintiffs' copyright in certain patterns and designs.
After careful comparison of each of defendant's luggage pieces with plaintiffs' copyrighted fabrics, the Court concludes that each of defendant's luggage pieces
contains designs which are substantially similar to a copyrighted design owned by the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction is granted..
[+"copyrighted fabrics" search]
-
United States v. Rohner Gehrig & Co., Inc. 9 Cust. Ct. 591 - 1942 [CITATION only]
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
Walt Disney Co. v. Powell 897 F. 2d 565 - Court of Appeals, Dist. of Columbia Circuit, 1990
At the time this suit arose, appellant conducted a wholesale souvenir business, selling items to local tourists through street vendors. Included in his inventory
were shirts with mouse faces printed on them that resembled Mickey and Minnie Mouse.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
-
ZELOUF INTERNATIONAL CORP. v. KANDY KISS OF CALIFORNIA, INC. Dist. Court, SD New York, 2009
Briefly stated, the complaint alleges that defendant Kandy Kiss of California, Inc., a garment manufacturer, obtained access to plaintiff's copyrighted
fabric designs, supplied samples of those fabrics to Morex for the purpose of having Morex "knock off" the fabric designs, purchased the infringing
fabric from Morex, and used it to manufacture garments, which it sold to defendant Sears, Roebuck and Co., which in turn sold the goods through its
Internet web site
For the foregoing reasons, Morex's motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction [docket item 10] is granted.
[+"copyrighted fabric" search]
|
