Stanford Center for Internet and Society

In the District of Minnesota, several recording companies including Capitol, Sony BMG, and Warner Bros. sued defendant Jammie Thomas for copyright infringement. The suit alleged that the defendant had illegally downloaded and distributed the plaintiffs' copyrighted sound recordings using peer-to-peer file-sharing software. The case went to trial, and the jury found for the plaintiffs, awarding $222,000 in damages. Following a careful review of the relevant statutes, legislative history, and case law, however, the court decided that a jury instruction that too broadly defined the concept of distribution had been erroneous and required a new trial. At the end of its opinion, the court called on Congress to standardize the range of peer-to-peer liability and damages.

Plaintiff Blue Nile, Inc. and Defendant Ice.com both own and operate online diamond and fine jewelry retail sales businesses. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant copied both certain elements of Plaintiff’s website in violation of the Copyright Act and the “overall look and feel” of Plaintiff’s diamond search webpages in violation of the Lanham Act. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s claim of trade dress infringement and three state law claims—violation of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment and restitution—on the grounds that these were preempted by Plaintiff’s copyright claims. The District Court for the Western District of Washington (i) denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s trademark infringement claim finding that a developed factual record was necessary given the novel nature of the claim, but (ii) granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss on the three state law claims.

Blue Nile, Inc. v. Ice.Com, Inc., No. C06-1002RSL (W.D. Wash. 2007).