F. 3d 581 Case Study

The moving party is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law only when there is no issue of material fact of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56; Williams v. Crichton, 84 F.3d 581 (2d Cir. 1996). The plaintiff must show that there is a genuine issue about the facts of the case that will affect the outcome and that a jury would return a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. Williams, 84 F.3d at 582. In addition, the court must make all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party. Id. at 587. The Copyright Act of 1976 allows copyright owners certain exclusive rights to their original work. 17 U.S.C.A. §§ 101 et seq. (West 2010). In order to establish copyright infringement, a valid copyright and copying of the original elements must be proven. …show more content…
2d 164 (S.D.N.Y 1990). When unlawful appropriation is a genuine issue, the plaintiff must show that there are substantial similarities between the original protectable elements of the plaintiff’s work and the defendant’s work. Silberstein v. John Does, 242 Fed. App’x 720-23 (2d Cir 2007). Furthermore, when no reasonable jury can find substantial similarity between the original protectable elements of works, summary judgment is granted. Williams, 84 F.3d 581. Therefore, summary judgment may be granted when no jury would find the original protectable elements of two original works to be substantially similar and when access to the alleged work is a bare possibility. Therefore, summary judgment is appropriate for the defendant because it cannot be established that the defendant, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq, is accountable of improper copying and there is insufficient evidence to support access by the defendant to the copyrighted material. Additionally, because the similarities between the protectable elements of works are not probative of copying and the defendant’s work does not show a substantial similarity of protectable expression of the alleged infringed work, it is proper to grant the defendant summary