Case 8: Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens LLP , 619 F.3d 301 (2010). Frederick Bouchat

Question

Case 8: Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens LLP, 619 F.3d 301 (2010).

Frederick Bouchat owns the copyright on a 1995 drawing that contains what will be referred to here as the Shield logo. Bouchat proposed the Shield logo for use as the team logo of the Baltimore Ravens, a National Football League (NFL) team, but he and the Ravens did not arrive at a licensing agreement. Yet during the 1996, 1997, and 1998 football seasons (the first three seasons for the team), the Ravens used a team logo - known as the Flying B logo - that was very similar to the Shield logo. The Flying B logo was displayed on the side of the helmets worn by Ravens players, was painted on the team's home field, and was printed on flags, hats, tickets, and other assorted objects. Merchandise produced and sold with the NFL's authorization - but without Bouchat's authorization - also displayed the Flying B logo. In 1999, the Ravens switched to a different team logo.

In earlier stages of litigation brought by Bouchat against the Ravens and the NFL, the defendants were held liable for copyright infringement in regard to the uses described above. In the particular aspect of the litigation that is relevant here, Bouchat sought an injunction barring the depictions of the Flying B logo in the 1996 through 1998 season highlight films, whose production and sale involved and benefited the Ravens and the NFL. Evidence presented to the federal district court revealed that the NFL sold Ravens highlight films of the 1996, 1997, and 1998 seasons to members of the public. The films were shot during and produced shortly after each season, and they had not been edited since their first release for sale. The Ravens organization also played a short highlight film from the 1996 season on its large video screen during home games. The highlight films contained actual game footage. The Flying B logo was displayed in the films just as it was during each game - primarily on the helmets of the Ravens players. The logo also appeared occasionally in the films' graphics and interview backdrops.

Bouchat also sought an injunction barring another use of the Flying B logo: a use in the lobby of the Ravens headquarters. The logo appeared in a collage depicting the history of the Ravens. The collage included photos that showed the logo on Ravens helmets, as well as a sheet of old game tickets displaying the logo. The defendants argued that the uses of the logo in the highlight films and in the lobby constituted fair use. The parties agreed to submit the case to the district court for a bench trial on the fair use question.

TRUE OR FALSE WITH EXPLANATION:

1. Bouchat’s ownership of the copyright to the Shield logo, sustained earlier in the litigation, is protected for the artist’s life plus 70 years.

2. The Baltimore Ravens’ highlight films of seasons in which they used a logo substantially similar to Bouchat’s copyrighted logo did not constitute fair use, because the use of the Shield logo is essentially the same as the use during the team’s football games: promoting fan interest in the football team and ticket sales.

3. The use of copyrighted Shield logo in the highlight films is minimal, considering the dramatic editing, music and narration in the highlight films, which constitute a transformative use of the logo.

4. The depictions of the Flying B logo in photos of Ravens football players displayed in the lobby of the Ravens corporate headquarter constitutes fair use, because the purpose of the display is not commercial, but informative and historical.

5. The inclusion of the Flying B logo in the highlight films of the Ravens football games is a direct infringement of Bouchat’s copyright.

1. Bouchat’s ownership of the copyright to the Shield logo, sustained earlier in the litigation, is protected for the artist’s life plus 70 years.

2. The Baltimore Ravens’ highlight films of seasons in which they used a logo substantially similar to Bouchat’s copyrighted logo did not constitute fair use, because the use of the Shield logo is essentially the same as the use during the team’s football games: promoting fan interest in the football team and ticket sales.

3. The use of copyrighted Shield logo in the highlight films is minimal, considering the dramatic editing, music and narration in the highlight films, which constitute a transformative use of the logo.

4. The depictions of the Flying B logo in photos of Ravens football players displayed in the lobby of the Ravens corporate headquarter constitutes fair use, because the purpose of the display is not commercial, but informative and historical.

5. The inclusion of the Flying B logo in the highlight films of the Ravens football games is a direct infringement of Bouchat’s copyright.

Explanation / Answer

1. The statement is TRUE. A ownership of copyright is protected for artists life plus 70 years or 95 years from date of publication or 120 years from the date of creation, depending on whichever comes first.

2. The statement is TRUE. The production and sale of these films involved and benefited the Ravens and the NFL, it is proven by the evidence which were submitted to the federal district court that the NFL sold Ravens highlight films of the 1996, 1997, and 1998 seasons. These films gathered publicity and revenue which may be due to presence of the logo in the film.

3. The statement is FALSE. As films were produced shortly after first season are not edited since. The use is not minimal as Ravens generated revenue from the films.

4. The statement is FALSE. There may not be a commercial benefit of the logo in the lobby but people may think that these logos are owned by Ravens and also may influence the public opinion in favour of Ravens.

5. The statement is TRUE. Both the logos were very much alike and Ravens profited from Flying B logo and also had the knowledge about patent of the shield logo. Hence it is both direct and indirect infringement.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.