Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Asset Marketing Systems, Inc. v. Gagnon

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
542 F.3d 748 (2008)


Facts

Kevin Gagnon (plaintiff) acted as an independent information-technology contractor for Asset Marketing Systems, Incorporated (AMS) (defendant). Gagnon maintained AMS’s computer systems and built custom programs or modified existing programs to meet AMS’s operational needs. In exchange for Gagnon’s work, AMS paid Gagnon about $2 million over four years. In May 2000, AMS and Gagnon entered a one-year technical-services agreement (TSA) that detailed Gagnon’s services for AMS. The TSA stated that Gagnon would complete custom-application programming for AMS, but it did not mention licensing or future costs. In June 2003, Gagnon proposed an outside-vendor agreement (OVA) that stated Gagnon would retain all copyrights and patents in any custom work, but that AMS had a non-exclusive, unlimited license in any programs developed for AMS. AMS did not sign the contract, and at the end of June 2003, AMS decided to terminate the relationship with Gagnon. Gagnon and AMS created a plan for Gagnon to cease work by September 15, 2003. Between June and October, AMS and Gagnon made demands of each other related to the custom programs and the source code, with each asserting ownership of the programs. Gagnon sued AMS for copyright infringement, and AMS moved for summary judgment. The district court granted the motion, and Gagnon appealed the decision.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.