|
WELCOME TO THE COPYRIGHT
CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WEBSITE
December 5, 2011
The Second Circuit has denied, without opinion or recorded dissent, the petitions for rehearing filed by the plaintiffs and defendants. Attached are a copy of the docket sheet and the orders entered since the petitions were lodged.
|
December 5, 2011
On August 31, 2011, the Settlement Class and the Defendants each separately filed a petition for rehearing, asking the Second Circuit appellate panel to reconsider and modify its opinion or, in the alternative, for the Second Circuit to review the opinion en banc. The briefs filed by the parties are here:
|
August 17, 2011
The Second Circuit Appeals Court vacated the settlement and sent the case back to the District Court, where the parties can work on another settlement or litigate the case. To view a copy of the Court’s opinion, click here. The parties have not yet determined what action to take at this point. Please visit this website periodically for further updates.
|
Status as of August 1, 2011: As of August 1, 2011, this case is presently still pending before the Second Circuit following the Supreme Court's March 2, 2010 reversal of the Second Circuit's 2009 ruling.
On March 2, 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in this case, holding that section 411(a) of the Copyright Act (which requires that a copyright be registered before the holder can sue for infringement) does not restrict a federal court’s subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement lawsuits. Therefore, the Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit’s ruling that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to approve this settlement because it includes unregistered works. The Supreme Court's opinion is viewable in pdf here.
The only question considered by the Supreme Court was the section 411(a) jurisdictional issue. The matter will return to the Second Circuit for that court to review the merits of the settlement, and decide whether the District Court was justified in approving the settlement. We will update you with further developments.
|
On October 7, 2009, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument on the question of: Does 17 U.S.C. §411(a) of the Copyright Act restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts over copyright infringement actions? The transcript of the oral argument can be downloaded HERE.
|
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
|
If you submitted a claim in the class action settlement naming the Tribune Company or any of its related entities as an infringing publisher, your legal rights may be affected by their December 8, 2008 bankruptcy filing.
On December 8, 2008, Tribune Company, et al., (collectively, the “Debtors”) filed petitions in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware seeking relief under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. If you are a freelance author who named any of the Debtors as an infringing publisher in claims submitted in the In Re Electronic Databases Copyright class action which is currently pending before the United States Supreme Court, your legal rights may be affected by the Tribune’s bankruptcy and you may want to review the important dates, claims deadline, list of Debtors, related information and documents available at the official bankruptcy website located at http://chapter11.epiqsystems.com/clientdefault.aspx?pk=7d2b7379-c031-4bdd-b0b1-9977bd9b8091&l=1. At the website, you will also find general information about the bankruptcy proceeding, the proof of claim forms, identification of the key committee members, and other information to help you determine whether your legal rights are affected and where to seek further information.
|
On March 2, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the parties’ petition to review the 2d Circuit appeals court’s decision to overturn the settlement. This means that the Supreme Court will decide whether the appeals court correctly rejected the settlement or whether it erred in doing so. The good news is that the settlement may ultimately be upheld, and all claiming authors, including those of unregistered works, may still get paid. Unfortunately, this also means that it will take a while longer to learn once and for all whether those claims will be paid. Please review this site every few months for further updates. The case name before the Supreme Court is Reed Elvesier, et al., v. Muchnick, et al. (08-203).
|
This is an update on the Objectors’ appeal from an order and judgment certifying a class of freelance authors and approving the settlement of their copyright infringement claims arising from the unauthorized reproduction of their works. The Second Circuit panel heard oral argument on March 7, 2007.
On November 29, 2007, the Second Circuit issued its opinion. The Court ruled 2-1 that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to approve a settlement that includes claims concerning unregistered works (the Category C claims). The Second Circuit vacated the certification and settlement approval, and remanded the matter back to the District Court for proceedings consistent with its opinion.
The Second Circuit’s November 29, 2007 opinion (the majority opinion and the dissent) is viewable by clicking here.
Because the parties believed that the Second Circuit’s opinion was incorrect, they asked the Second Circuit to reconsider the opinion and grant another hearing or review it en banc. However, on April 15, 2008, the Second Circuit denied the petition for rehearing or for en banc review. Consistent with the original November 29, 2007 opinion and order, the case has been sent back to the District Court.
The Second Circuit’s April 15, 2008 order is viewable by clicking here.
The parties now intend to file a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, meaning they intend to ask the Supreme Court to review and reverse the Second Circuit’s November 29, 2007 opinion. The petition was filed on August 13, 2008.
Please monitor this website for a report on the Supreme Court's response, which could take months. |
IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING STATUS OF CLAIMS PROCESSING:
The proposed settlement was granted final approval by the Honorable George B. Daniels of the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York at the Final Fairness Hearing on Tuesday, September 27th, 2005. Click here to review the final signed judgment. On October 21, 2005, the following class members who objected to the settlement appealed the District Court's ruling granting final approval of the settlement: Irvin Muchnick, Charles Schwartz, Abraham Zaleznik, Jack Sands, Todd Pitock, Judith Stacey, Judith Trotsky, Christopher Goodrich, Kathy Glicken, and Anita Bartholomew. As a result of their appeal, the settlement is not final. Until the settlement is final, no claims can be paid.
On November 29, 2007, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's decision approving the settlement, ruling that the District Court did not have jurisdiction over the claims involving unregistered works. The parties strongly believe that the appeals court is incorrect in its ruling, and are presently asking the appeals court to reconsider its ruling. We will let you know what the appeals court says when we have a response, which could take several months.
Once the settlement is final, all valid claims will be paid in accordance with the settlement terms. In the event that the objectors' appeal is successful, the settlement will not be final and the case will be sent back to the District Court for further proceedings and/or to resume the litigation in accordance with the appellate court's instructions.
Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the database defendants and publishers will have an opportunity to challenge claims that have been made and there will be a dispute resolution process. The parties expect this process to begin in November 2006 and anticipate that the process will take 3-6 months. No payments will be made until the dispute resolution process is completed for all claims and all appeals are resolved.
Please be sure to monitor this website or listen to the recorded announcement at the toll-free number (1-800-330-0516) for updates on the status of the appeal and settlement claims process.
Please visit this site for updates concerning the settlement and the claims process. You may also contact plaintiffs' lead counsel at mboni@bonizack.com, drice@hosielaw.com or ajd@girardgibbs.com.
Thank you for your cooperation, and we apologize for any confusion the June 16 letter may have caused.
THIS SITE PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:
|
