Jetmax Limited v. Big Lots, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2017 WL 3726756 (2017)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Jetmax Limited (plaintiff) designed, manufactured, and sold the tear drop light set, a string of ornamental lights with sculpted, tear-drop shaped, decorative covers, eight sets of double grooves, iridescent finishes, and ornamental dangling stones. Jetmax alleged it owned a valid certificate of copyright registration for the tear drop light set. Advance International, Inc. (Advance) (defendant) manufactured the advance light set, which was then sold by Big Lots, Inc. (defendant). The advance light set was also a string of ornamental lights with sculpted, tear-drop shaped decorative covers and eight sets of double grooves. The advance light set did not have ornamental dangling stones or an iridescent finish. Jetmax filed a claim for copyright infringement against Advance and Big Lots and moved for summary judgment. Advance and Big Lots cross-moved for summary judgment, arguing that (1) Jetmax did not have a valid certificate of copyright, and (2) the tear drop light set was not copyrightable because it lacked originality and was a useful article.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Forrest, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.