United States v. Cross
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
816 F.2d 297 (1987)
- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
Earnest Cross, Richard Denney, and Diana Fleek (defendants) were convicted of conspiracy to willfully infringe the copyrights of multiple motion pictures for purposes of commercial advantage as well as the substantive charge of copyright infringement. The charges arose from a video-rental store Cross and Denney co-owned called Porky’s. Fleek worked at Porky’s and was Cross’s live-in girlfriend. In addition to offering legitimate copies of movies for rent, Porky’s also rented unauthorized copies. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigated Porky’s after receiving complaints from a competitor video store but halted the investigation after it was made public in the media. FBI officers visited Porky’s, told Cross to stop selling illegal copies, and instructed him on how to identify unauthorized copies based on a review of each tape. Cross and Denney removed their inventory of unauthorized tapes from the store. Months later, the FBI received new complaints about Porky’s selling illegal copies and placed an undercover agent in the store as a part-time employee. That new investigation confirmed that Porky’s continued to rent unauthorized copies. Fleek showed the undercover agent how to remove labels from original tapes and transfer them to unauthorized copies. Additional agents posing as customers rented several unauthorized tapes from Porky’s. Cross, Denney, and Fleek appealed their convictions, arguing, among other points, that the United States failed to prove that they acted willfully.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marovitz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.