Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruling in Banks v. The Fly on the Wall

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruling in Banks v. The Fly on the Wall

Ratings: (0)|Views: 39,574|Likes:
Published by DealBook

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: DealBook on Jun 20, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





10-1372-cvBarclays Capital Inc. v. Theflyonthewall.com, Inc.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS1FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT2August Term, 20093(Argued: August 6, 2010Decided: June 20, 2011)4Docket No. 10-1372-cv5-------------------------------------6BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER &7SMITH INC., and MORGAN STANLEY & CO. INC.,8Plaintiffs-Appellees,9- v -10THEFLYONTHEWALL.COM, INC.,11Defendant-Appellant.12-------------------------------------13After a bench trial, the district court (Denise L.14Cote, Judge) entered a judgment for the plaintiffs concluding15that on seventeen occasions, the defendant had infringed the16plaintiffs' copyrights in their research reports, and that by17collecting and disseminating to its own subscribers the summary18recommendations with respect to securities trading contained in19the plaintiffs' reports, the defendant had committed the New York20state-law tort of "hot news" misappropriation. To remedy the21copyright violations, the district court ordered the defendant to22pay statutory damages, prejudgment interest, and attorney's fees.23The court also permanently enjoined the defendant from "further24infringement of any portion of the copyrighted elements of any25research reports generated by" the plaintiffs. Based on the26
2plaintiffs' "hot news" misappropriation claim, the district court1also permanently enjoined the defendant from "dissemination of2the Firms' Recommendations until one half-hour after the opening3of the New York Stock Exchange or 10:00 a.m., whichever is4later." The defendant appeals with respect to the judgment and5injunction against it on the "hot news" misappropriation claim.6We conclude that the plaintiffs' "hot news" misappropriation7claim is preempted by federal copyright law. We reverse the8judgment of the district court to that extent and remand with9instructions to dismiss the claim.10Reversed in part and remanded. Judge Raggi concurs in11the result by separate opinion.12Before:POOLER, SACK, and RAGGI, Circuit Judges.13GLENN F. OSTRAGER, Ostrager Chong14Flaherty & Broitman P.C. (Joshua S.15Broitman, of counsel), New York, NY, for16Appellant.17R. BRUCE RICH, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP18(Benjamin Marks, Jonathan Bloom, and19Lisa R. Eskow, of counsel), New York,20NY, for Appellees.21KATHLEEN M. SULLIVAN, Quinn Emanuel22Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP (Marc L.23Greenwald, Jonathan B. Oblak, and Todd24Anten, of counsel), New York, NY, for25Amici Curiae Google Inc. and Twitter,26Inc.27ANDREW L. DEUTSCH, DLA Piper LLP (US)28(Nicholas Aldrich, of counsel), New29York, NY, for Amici Curiae Advance30Publications, Inc., Agence France-31Presse, A.H. Belo Corporation, The32Associated Press, Belo Corp., The E.W.33Scripps Company, Gannett Company, Inc.,34
3The McClatchy Company, Newspaper1Association of America, The New York2Times Company, Philadelphia Media3Holdings, LLC, Stephens Media LLC, Time4Inc., and the Washington Post.5STEPHEN KINNAIRD, Paul, Hastings,6Janofsky & Walker LLP (Barry Sher,7William F. Sullivan, Peter M. Stone, and8Morgan J. Miller, of counsel),9Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae The10Securities Industry and Financial11Markets Association.12Christopher A. Mohr, Meyer, Klipper &13Mohr, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Amicus14Curiae Reed Elsevier Inc.1516Robert P. LoBue, Patterson Belknap Webb17& Tyler LLP, New York, NY, for Amicus18Curiae Dow Jones & Company, Inc.19William D. Edick, Pickard & Djinis LLP,20Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae The21Investorside Research Association.22Henry R. Kaufman, Henry R. Kaufman, P.C.23(Michael K. Cantwell, of counsel), New24York, NY, for Amicus Curiae25StreetAccount LLC.26Fred von Lohmann (Corynne McSherry, of27counsel), San Francisco, CA), for Amici28Curiae Citizen Media Law Project,29Electronic Frontier Foundation, and30Public Citizen, Inc.31SACK, Circuit Judge:3233The parties, the district court, and amici have raised34a wide variety of interesting legal and policy issues during the35course of this litigation. We need not address most of them. We36conclude that under principles that are well established in this37Circuit, the plaintiffs' claim against the defendant for "hot38

Activity (8)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Julie Ehrlich liked this
Vivian Searcy liked this
Haro Yahi liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->