Associated Press v. All Headline News Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the plaintiff alleged in its complaint that the CMI was the identification of itself as the owner and author of certain published articles that were allegedly copied
• suggesting, in a case presenting facts more closely analogous to INS, that the plaintiff may have had a non-preempted \hot news\ cause of action
• suggesting, in a case presenting facts more closely analogous to INS, that the plaintiff may have had a non-preempted “hot news” cause of action
• noting there is no textual support for limiting the DMCA’s application to technological processes, and declining to consider legislative history in the face of clear statutory language
• exercising jurisdiction over a similar state law “hot news” misappropriation claim
• CMI removal claim viable where defendants \instructed reporters to remove or alter the identification of the [Associated Press] as author or copyright holder of the articles\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).