Red Baron-Franklin Park, Inc. v. Taito Corp.

883 F.2d 275 (1989)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Red Baron-Franklin Park, Inc. v. Taito Corp.

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
883 F.2d 275 (1989)

Facts

Taito Corporation (defendant) was a Japanese company that sold video games, including Double Dragon. Taito had registered Double Dragon with the US Copyright Office. Red Baron-Franklin Park, Inc. (Red Baron) (plaintiff) operated publicly accessible video-game arcades where patrons could pay to play on various video-game units, including units fitted with the circuit boards needed to play Double Dragon. Red Baron had not purchased the Double Dragon circuit boards from Taito and had not been licensed by Taito to use the circuit boards. Rather, Red Baron had obtained the circuit boards on the so-called “gray market,” through which Red Baron (1) purchased used circuit boards that Taito had originally sold to other entities in Japan and (2) then imported the circuit boards into the United States without Taito’s consent. Taito asserted that when Taito originally sold the circuit boards, each board contained a restrictive notice indicating that the game was for use in Japan only and that selling, exporting, or operating the game outside of Japan could violate international copyright or trademark law. Red Baron sued Taito in federal district court, seeking a declaratory judgment that Red Baron had not infringed Taito’s copyright rights. The district court ruled in Red Baron’s favor, holding that Taito’s initial sale of the Double Dragon circuit boards in Japan had extinguished Taito’s rights under the copyright laws. The district court based its conclusion on the first-sale doctrine, codified at 17 U.S.C. § 109(a), which provides that if someone legally purchases a copy of a copyrighted work, the copyright holder may not limit the purchaser’s sale or disposition of that copy. Taito appealed, arguing that although the first-sale doctrine might have given Red Baron the right to purchase, import, and sell the Double Dragon circuit boards without interference by Taito, Taito had a separate right to perform Double Dragon publicly and had not conveyed that right to Red Baron. Taito thus asserted that Red Baron was infringing Taito’s copyright with respect to the performance right by making the Double Dragon boards available to the arcade patrons.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Winter, J.)

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 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership