Copyright infringement at the movies

Breaking news and expert analysis on legal and compliance issues

[Back To Home][Back To Archives]

From Intellectual Property Law Daily, March 11, 2019

U.S. Copyright Act did not apply when no domestic misconduct occurred

By Thomas K. Lauletta, J.D.

An artist’s suit against a German art collector for copyright infringement, based on the display and attempted sale of an allegedly unauthorized copy of artist’s sculpture, was not actionable because all the alleged acts of infringement occurred in Germany, not the United States.

The federal district court in New York City has dismissed a complaint filed by artist Cady Noland against Wilhelm Schurmann, a German art collector, who had purchased her Log Cabin sculpture and displayed it in Germany for several years before attempting to sell to an American buyer. While it was displayed in a German museum for 10 years, Schurmann (with Noland’s consent) stained the wood a darker color. Later, due to damage to the sculpture caused by its display outside, Schurmann replaced all the sculpture’s wooden parts with wood shipped from Montana. Noting that the U.S. Copyright Act does not have extraterritorial application and concluding that none of the alleged acts of infringement happened within the U.S., the court rejected Noland’s contentions based on the Copyright Act (Noland v. Galerie Michael Janssen, March 8, 2019, Oetken, J.).

While the U.S. Copyright Act does not generally have extraterritorial application, the court said that an exception applied if a foreign infringer committed a domestic predicate act that was itself an act in violation of the U.S. copyright laws. Noland argued two possible predicate acts of Schurmann: (1) his purchase of wood in the United States to refurbish the artwork, and (2) his attempted sale of the artwork to an American buyer pursuant to a contract calling for delivery of the work to a location in the United States. (This attempted sale was never consummated.)

The court rejected the first of these contentions. While it might be argued that the use of the American-sourced wood to refurbish the artwork constituted a predicate act that would trigger the application of U.S. copyright law, the act of buying the wood itself clearly was not an act of copyright infringement.

The court also rejected Noland’s arguments for application of the U.S. Copyright Act based on the attempted sale of the work, noting that her complaint did not allege any activities by Schurmann in the United States. Nor did she allege that the infringing artwork was delivered in the United States.

An interesting allegation centered around a term in the contract for sale with the American buyer, which included a New York choice-of-law provision and that called for eventual delivery of the artwork in the United States. The court noted that there is now "a developing doctrine in the copyright law" (not yet addressed by the Second Circuit), regarding whether an unconsummated offer to distribute a copy of an artwork for sale can by itself constitute a distribution of an unauthorized copy that violates §106(3) of the copyright act. However, the court declined to rule on this issue because Noland had not alleged that any conduct relating to the offered sale of the artwork occurred within the United States.

Because the court dismissed Noland’s domestic copyright claims, it lastly considered her claims that were based on alleged violations of the German Copyright Act and negligence claims under New York and German law. Here, the court, having original jurisdiction over the original claim, also had supplemental jurisdiction over remaining additional claims. However, citing 28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(3), the court declined in its discretion to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the German copyright claims and the negligence claim.

This case is No. 1:17-cv-05452-JPO.

Attorneys: Andrew D. Epstein (Baker Epstein & Loscocco) for Cady Noland. William Laurence Charron (Pryor Cashman LLP) for Galerie Michael Janssen and Michael Janssen.

Companies: Galerie Michael Janssen

MainStory: TopStory Copyright NewYorkNews

Back to Top

IP Law Daily

Introducing Wolters Kluwer IP Law Daily — a daily reporting service created by attorneys, for attorneys — providing same-day coverage of breaking news, court decisions, legislation, and regulatory activity.


A complete daily report of the news that affects your world

  • View full summaries of federal and state court decisions.
  • Access full text of legislative and regulatory developments.
  • Customize your daily email by topic and/or jurisdiction.
  • Search archives for stories of interest.

Not just news — the right news

  • Get expert analysis written by subject matter specialists—created by attorneys for attorneys.
  • Track law firms and organizations in the headlines with our new “Who’s in the News” feature.
  • Promote your firm with our new reprint policy.

24/7 access for a 24/7 world

  • Forward information with special copyright permissions, encouraging collaboration between counsel and colleagues.
  • Save time with mobile apps for your BlackBerry, iPhone, iPad, Android, or Kindle.
  • Access all links from any mobile device without being prompted for user name and password.