Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got it Right

Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau
{"title":"Substantial Similarity: Kohus Got it Right","authors":"Gabriel Godoy-Dalmau","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.6.2.substantial","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Note is organized as follows. Part I discusses the historical development of the substantial similarity inquiry and its role in a Plaintiff’s prima facie case of copyright infringement. Part II evaluates more recent developments in the substantial similarity inquiry. Part III argues that the various standards that lower courts have developed are themselves substantially similar to each other. This analysis is in line with the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus. Although largely ignored by the scholarly community, the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus got it right.","PeriodicalId":333345,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.6.2.substantial","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This Note is organized as follows. Part I discusses the historical development of the substantial similarity inquiry and its role in a Plaintiff’s prima facie case of copyright infringement. Part II evaluates more recent developments in the substantial similarity inquiry. Part III argues that the various standards that lower courts have developed are themselves substantially similar to each other. This analysis is in line with the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus. Although largely ignored by the scholarly community, the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kohus got it right.
本质上的相似:科胡斯是对的
本笔记组织如下。第一部分论述了实质相似调查的历史发展及其在著作权侵权原告表面证据案件中的作用。第二部分评估了实质相似性调查的最新进展。第三部分认为,下级法院制定的各种标准本身在本质上彼此相似。这一分析与第六巡回法院对Kohus案的判决一致。尽管在很大程度上被学术界所忽视,但第六巡回法院对Kohus案的裁决是正确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信