Copyright Claims Survive the Northern District's First Rule 12(b)(6) Twombly Analysis

Allen v. Destiny’s Child, No. 06 C 6606, Min. Order (N.D. Ill. Jul. 30, 2007) (Holderman, C.J.).*

Judge Holderman granted in part defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s copyright infringement claims. Plaintiff alleges that defendants, including the musical group Destiny’s Child and its members, infringed plaintiffs’ copyrights in his song “Cater 2 U” by producing and selling Destiny’s Child’s song of the same name (watch the video of  Destiny’s Child’s version on their website). The Court dismissed the infringement claims regarding the two copyrights that plaintiff did not own, but allowed the claims as to plaintiff’s other two copyrights. Plaintiff’s allegations that he owned the two copyrights, provided copies of his performances of the song to various defendants who relayed them to Destiny’s Child and that the Destiny’s Child song is musically and lyrically similar were sufficient to meet the new Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss standard set forth in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1969 (2007) (read more about the decision at the University of Chicago Faculty Blog). The Court did, however, dismiss claims against defendant McDonald’s. McDonald’s was only charged with having received financial gain from the infringement because it sponsored a Destiny’s Child tour during which the song was performed. The Court quoted upon Twombly in explaining its decision:

The court is not convinced that [plaintiff] has “nudged [his] claims across the line from conceivable to plausible.”

*  You can read a copy of the Minute Order here.

Ronald Beats Mickey: Northern District Home to Several Top Global Brands

According to Interbrand Ronald is worth more than Mickey.  Interbrand has just published its 2007 Best Global Brands, ranking the top 100 brands that:  1) derive at least a third of earnings outside of the brand’s home country; 2) are recognized beyond the brand's customer base; and 3) have public marketing and financial data.  Interbrand also excludes brands that are hard to identify as having brand value separate from their products or services. For example, pharma brands are excluded because Interbrand has determined that consumers focus on products rather than the overarching company branding. That leaves Northern District companies like Abbott Labs out of the running.  But the Northern District is still very well represented.  For example, McDonald's jumped one spot this year, surpassing Disney in brand value.  Here are the Northern District companies (or at least those very near the Northern District) on the list:

Northern District Top Global Brands
07 Rank 06 Rank Company 07 Brand Value (in USD Millions)
8 9 McDonald's 29.398
59 59 Wrigley's 5.777
77 69 Motorola 4.149
86 79 Kraft 3.732
       

Thanks to the Seattle Trademark Lawyer for identifying the ranking.

Extra, Extra, Read All About It: Patent Law Is Being Shaped By The Supreme Court

Although it is not about the Northern District, there is a great article on the front page of today's Wall Street Journal about the Supreme Court's increasing interest in patent law.  The article is here (subscription required) or you can read about it on the Journal's Law Blog here.  The Journal's Law Blog also has an interesting post here on McDonald's patent application covering methods for making sandwiches.