September 3, 2024

The rapid growth of internet fantasy sports has raised the question as to whether sports statistics are information in the public domain or copyrightable info

The rapid growth of internet fantasy sports has raised the question as to whether sports statistics are information in the public domain or copyrightable information. After reviewing the Read: NBA v. Motorola, Inc., 105 F.3d 841 case found in the Learn section, answer the following questions:

1. What characteristics of player profiles and performance statistics are most likely to be determined as copyrightable? Base your position on findings in the case study.
2. What kinds of related issues do you think we may see in the future, given the continued growth in this area of the sport industry?

NBAv.Motorola_Inc._105F.3d841.PDF

Date and Time: Monday, September 2, 2024 5:56:00PM EDT

Job Number: 232526712

Document (1)

1. NBA v. Motorola, Inc., 105 F.3d 841

Client/Matter: -None-

http://www.lexisnexis.com/about-us/

http://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/terms/privacy-policy.page

http://www.lexisnexis.com/terms/general.aspx

http://www.lexisnexis.com/terms/copyright.aspx

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&idtype=PID&context=1519360

Caution As of: September 2, 2024 9:56 PM Z

NBA v. Motorola, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

October 21, 1996, Argued ; January 30, 1997, Decided

Docket Nos. 96-7975, 96-7983 (CON), 96-9123 (XAP)

Reporter 105 F.3d 841 *; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 1527 **; 41 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1585 ***; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P27,591; 1997-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P71,705; 25 Media L. Rep. 1385

THE NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION and NBA PROPERTIES, INC., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant- Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. MOTOROLA, INC. doing business as Sports Trax, Defendant-Counter-Claimant- Appellant-Cross-Appellee, SPORTS TEAM ANALYSIS AND TRACKING SYSTEMS, INC. doing business as STATS, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.

Prior History: [**1] Motorola and Sports Team Analysis and Tracking Systems ("STATS") appeal from a permanent injunction entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Loretta A. Preska, Judge) barring, inter alia, the sale of a handheld pager that displays updated scores and statistics of National Basketball Association games as they are played. The NBA and NBA Properties, Inc. cross-appeal from the district court's dismissal of its Lanham Act claim. We hold that Motorola and STATS have not unlawfully misappropriated NBA's property by transmitting "real-time" NBA game scores and statistics taken from television and radio broadcasts of games in progress. We therefore reverse on the misappropriation claim and vacate the injunction. On the cross-appeal, we affirm.

Disposition: We therefore reverse on the misappropriation claim and vacate the injunction. On the cross-appeal, we affirm.

Core Terms

misappropriation, broadcasts, games, preemption, pager, preempted, district court, subject matter, hot- news, survive, copyright protection, free-riding, updates, arena, Copyright Act, transmission, authorship, cases, site, state law, rights, radio, copying, sports, factual information, state law claim, general scope, injunction, scores, copyright infringement

Case Summary

Procedural Posture

Appellants, a marketer and a supplier, sought review of a permanent injunction entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which barred appellants from transmitting "real-time" sports game data via handheld pagers. Appellees, a basketball association and a related entity, cross- appealed the dismissal of their claims under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a).

Overview

Appellants were enjoined from transmitting scores or other data about professional basketball games in progress via handheld pagers. Appellees had brought various trademark and misappropriation claims against appellants for the transmissions. The district court found that appellants were liable for misappropriation. It also dismissed appellees' claims for false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a). On review, the court held that appellees' state law claims for misappropriation survived preemption. Because appellants expended their own resources to collect purely factual information, they did not free-ride on appellees' product. As to appellees' cross-appeal, the court held that the alleged false statements pertained to nonmaterial minutiae that did not misrepresent an inherent quality or characteristic of the appellees' product.

Outcome The court vacated the injunction because it found that appellants were not liable for misappropriation of the game data and affirmed the dismissal of appellees' Lanham Act claim because the false statements did not effect a misrepresentation of appellants' product.

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S9D-W4W2-8T6X-7177-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/shepards?id=urn:contentItem:7XWN-0BY1-2NSF-C51H-00000-00&category=initial&context=1519360

Page 2 of 16

LexisNexis® Headnotes

HN1[ ] Subject Matter, Common Law Copyrights

The court holds that the "hot-news" claim is limited to cases where: (i) a plaintiff generates or gathers information at a cost; (ii) the information is time- sensitive; (iii) a defendant's use of the information constitutes free-riding on the plaintiff's efforts; (iv) the defendant is in direct competition with a product or service offered by the plaintiffs; and (v) the ability of other parties to free-ride on the efforts of the plaintiff or others would so reduce the incentive to produce the product or service that its existence or quality would be substantially threatened.

HN2[ ] Literary Works, Definition of Literary Work

17 U.S.C.S. § 102(a) lists eight categories of "works of authorship" covered by the act, including such categories as "literary works," "musical works," and "dramatic works." The list does not include athletic events, and, although the list is concededly non- exclusive, such events are neither similar nor analogous to any of the listed categories.

Protection > Subject Matter > General Overview

HN3[ ] Statutory Copyright & Fixation, Original Works of Authorship

See 17 U.S.C.S. § 102(a).

HN4[ ] Statutory Copyright & Fixation, Fixation Requirement

The Copyright Act (the Act), 17 U.S.C.S. § 102(a), was amended in 1976 specifically to insure that simultaneously-recorded transmissions of live performances and sporting events would meet the Act's requirement that the original work of authorship be "fixed in any tangible medium of expression."

HN5[ ] Protected Subject Matter, Limited Protection for Factual Works

See 17 U.S.C.S. § 101.

105 F.3d 841, *841; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 1527, **1; 41 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1585, ***1585

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc1

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc2

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y0-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc3

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y0-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc4

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y0-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc5

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73XY-00000-00&context=1519360

Page 3 of 16

HN6[ ] Elements, Copying by Defendants

The "fact/expression dichotomy" is a bedrock principle of copyright law that limits severely the scope of protection in fact-based works. No author may copyright facts or ideas. The copyright is limited to those aspects of the work — termed "expression" — that displays the stamp of the author's originality.

HN7[ ] Subject Matter, Common Law Copyrights

Under 17 U.S.C.S. § 301, a state law claim is preempted when: (i) the state law claim seeks to vindicate "legal or equitable rights that are equivalent" to one of the bundle of exclusive rights already protected by copyright law under 17 U.S.C.S. § 106 — styled the "general scope requirement"; and (ii) the particular work to which the state law claim is being applied falls within the type of works protected by the Copyright Act under §§ 102 and 103 — styled the "subject matter requirement."

HN8[ ] Scope of Copyright Protection, Subject Matter

The subject matter requirement is met when the work of authorship being copied or misappropriated falls within the ambit of copyright protection.

Torts > … > Invasion of Privacy > Appropriation > Defenses

Torts > … > Invasion of Privacy > Appropriation > General Overview

HN9[ ] Federal & State Law Interrelationships, Federal Preemption

Once a performance is reduced to tangible form, there is no distinction between the performance and the recording of the performance for the purposes of preemption under 17 U.S.C.S. § 301(a).

105 F.3d 841, *841; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 1527, **1; 41 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1585, ***1585

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc6

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc7

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8T90-HV92-D6RV-H062-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y5-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y0-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S7X-DF02-8T6X-73Y1-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc8

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc9

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8T90-HV92-D6RV-H062-00000-00&context=1519360

Page 4 of 16

HN10[ ] Subject Matter, Common Law Copyrights

Copyrightable material often contains uncopyrightable elements within it, but 17 U.S.C.S. § 301 preemption bars state law misappropriation claims with respect to uncopyrightable as well as copyrightable elements.

HN11[ ] Subject Matter, Common Law Copyrights

Adoption of a partial preemption doctrine — preemption of claims based on misappropriation of broadcasts but no preemption of claims based on misappropriation of underlying facts — would expand significantly the reach of state law claims and render the preemption intended by Congress unworkable.

HN12[ ] Subject Matter, Common Law Copyrights

Under the general scope requirement, 17 U.S.C.S. § 301 preempts only those state law rights that may be abridged by an act which, in and of itself, would infringe one of the exclusive rights provided by federal copyright law. However, certain forms of commercial misappropriation otherwise within the general scope requirement will survive preemption if an "extra-element" test is met.

Business & Corporate Compliance > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > False Designation of Origin > Elements of False Designation of Origin Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > False Designation of Origin > Elements of False Designation of Origin

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > Trade Dress Protection > General Overview

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > Lanham Act > General Overview

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > False Advertising > General Overview

HN13[ ] False Designation of Origin, Elements of False Designation of Origin

See 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a)(1).

Business & Corporate Compliance > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > False Advertising > Elements of False Advertising Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition

105 F.3d 841, *841; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 1527, **1; 41 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1585, ***1585

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc10

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8T90-HV92-D6RV-H062-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc11

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc12

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8T90-HV92-D6RV-H062-00000-00&context=1519360

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RV0-0VD0-00B1-D4D2-00000-00&context=1519360&link=LNHNREFclscc13

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8S9D-W4W2-8T6X-7177-00000-00&context=1519360

Page 5 of 16

Law > False Advertising > Elements of False Advertising

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > Trade Dress Protection > General Overview

Trademark Law > … > Unfair Competition > Federal Unfair Competition Law > General Overview

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > Lanham Act > General Overview

Trademark Law > … > Federal Unfair Competition Law > False Advertising > General Overview

HN14[ ] False Advertising, Elements of False Advertising

To establish a false advertising claim under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a), the plaintiff must demonstrate that the statement in the challenged advertisement is false. Falsity may be established by proving that (1) the advertising is literally false as a factual matter, or (2) although the advertisement is literally true, it is likely to deceive or confuse customers. However, in addition to proving falsity, the plaintiff must also show that the defendants misrepresented an "inherent quality or characteristic" of the product.

Counsel: JEFFREY A. MISHKIN, The National Basketball Association and NBA Properties, Inc., New York, New York (Kathryn L. Barrett, Richard W. Buchanan, of counsel; Roger L. Zissu, Mark D. Engelmann, Raphael Winick, Weiss Dawid Fross Zelnick & Lehrman, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Counter- Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

HERBERT [**2] F. SCHWARTZ, Fish & Neave, New York, New York (Patricia A. Martone, Vincent N. Palladino, of counsel; Roger H. Dusberger, Motorola, Inc., of counsel), for Defendant-Counter-Claimant- Appellant- Cross-Appellee.

ANDREW L. DEUTSCH, Piper & Marbury, New York, New York (Edward F. Malaf, of counsel; Paul M. Levy, Alan D. Leib, Deutsch Levy & Engel Chartered, Chicago, Illinois, of counsel), for Defendant-Appellant-

Cross-Appellee.

Bruce P. Keller, Debevoise & Plimpton, New York, New York (Lorin L. Reisner, of counsel), for Amici Curiae National Football League, Office of the C

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.

The rapid growth of internet fantasy sports has raised the question as to whether sports statistics are information in the public domain or copyrightable info

Related Posts

What other factors could have pushed communities in the ‘hilly flanks’ of Mesopotamia to start cultivating anything at this particular moment in human hist

For this assignment, review the four case studies provided in the Assignment Case Studies media and select one child and one adolescent case study to use a

Review the following scenario and prepare and submit your performance interview guide to address the selected situation. This is based on chapter 9 of the t