Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11 SISYPHUS TOURING, INC.,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
I.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CV No. 15-09512-RSWL-PJW
ORDER Re: DEFENDANTS
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT [47];
PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR
PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[42]; DEFENDANTS MOTION
PURSUANT TO RULE 56(d)
TO DEFER CONSIDERATION
OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION
FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY
JUDGMENT [59];
DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT [72]
INTRODUCTION
The Court,
II. BACKGROUND
16 A.
Findings of Fact
17
Leto
Id. at 2:18-19.
MBLC
Id. at 3:13-20.
Id. at 3:15-16.
Id. at 3:21-22.
Id. at
Id. at 2:23-25.
Munaf has
Id. at 3:1-2.
Id. at 3:3-5.
Id. at 3:6-7.
Id. at 3:8-12.
Id.
Id. at 3:23-27.
Id. at
Munaf responded
Id. at 4:18-20.
Id. at 5:1-3.
Id. at 5:4-8.
Id. at 5:9-11.
Id. at 5:15-16.
Rosenberg
Id. at
Id. at 5:23-25.
26 Munaf sent Plaintiff a scanned copy of the non27 disclosure agreement on December 7, 2015 at 12:15 a.m.
28 Id. at 5:27-28.
Id. at 5:5-7.
I will not be
I do not
Id. at
I DID NOT
I AM
Id.
13 at 6:27-28; 7:1-3.
Id. at 7:6-9.
Id. at 7:11-17.
Id. at 7:21-24.
Id. at 8:5-8.
Id. at 8:13-
Id. at 8:27.
Id. at 9:1-2.
There is
Id. at 9:11-14.
Id. at 9:15-17.
22 B.
Procedural Background
23
1 defenses.
On March
On
On August
On August 2,
8 Opposition [65].
III. DISCUSSION
11 A.
Legal Standard
12
1.
13
A fact is
Twentieth Century-Fox
Fed. R. Civ. P.
7 56(a); see Nissan Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Fritz Cos.,
8 210 F.3d 1099, 1102-03 (9th Cir. 2000).
The burden
26 48.
27 ///
28
1 B.
Analysis
1.
3
4
17 U.S.C. 201(a).
If a piece
17
17 U.S.C. 101.
17 U.S.C. 101.
10
Id.
8 7:16-18.
9
Id. at
Id. at 10:2-6.
As the
Id. at 2:11-
11
2 Nordisco Corp., 969 F.2d 410, 413 (7th Cir. 1992), held
3 that the writing instrument for a work made for hire
4 must precede the creation of the property in order to
5 serve its purpose of identify the (noncreator) owner
6 unequivocally.
Id. at 412.
Works
Andreas
12
There is no genuine
2.
24
25
26
13
Defendants
Mot.
The
Hendry,
Under 204(a), a
Weinstein Co. v.
14
1 (S.D.N.Y. 2009).
5 New World Entmt, Ltd., 183 F.3d 922 (9th Cir. 1999)
6 (quoting Valente-Kritzer Video v. Pinckney, 881 F.2d
7 772, 775 (9th Cir. 1989)).
8
Munaf stated
15
1 transfer.
15 U.S.C. 7006
A signature or contract in
may not be denied legal effect,
Id.
The
To invalidate
16
1 congressional intent.
Metropolitan Regional
An
Id. at 602.
13 Munaf did have to click the send button and the email
14 had Jake Miller written at the bottom, purporting to
15 be Munafs signature.
There
3.
17
Id. at 827.
6 made for hire and there was a valid transfer from Munaf
7 to Defendants, the determination of whether an
8 nonexclusive implied license was granted is moot.
9
4.
10
11
5.
16
17
18
6.
18
IV. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants Motion
The Court
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
16
17 DATED: September 23, 2016
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19