Legal Opinion
Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 29, 2003No. 00 CIV. 2839(JSR)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
RAKOFF, District Judge.
Defendants Time Warner, Inc., BMG Entertainment, Inc., Universal Music Group, Inc., and their predecessors (collectively the “Record Companies”) 1 seek to recover their attorneys’ fees under the “fee-shifting” provisions of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 505. Plaintiffs have argued in response that they, if anyone, are the prevailing parties in this action and that defendants’ motion is made in bad faith and vexatiously, warranting sanctions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
By way of background, plaintiffs’ original and first amended complaints in this case…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Donald M. Israel Mark R. Taylor v. Daniel E. Carpenter Benefit Concepts New York, Inc. Voluntary Benefit Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Silvester v. Time Warner, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2003
- Union of Needletrades, Industrial & Textile Employees v. United States Immigration & Naturalization ServiceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Torres-Negron v. J & N RECORDS, LLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2007
- Catherine Balsley v. LFP, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- First Time Videos, LLC v. Does 1-500District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2011
- Ritani, LLC v. AghjayanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. London Music, U.K.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2004