Greene v. General Hospital 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 formation of a valid contract under Massachusetts law requires objective, not subjective, intent”
• explaining that a “mere[] . . . acknowledge[ment] that the referenced material is relevant to the contract” is not sufficient to incorporate extrinsic terms
• noting that a work “may be both joint and derivative, with [the original work’s author] owning the copyright in the underlying work . . . and co-owning the copyright in the derivative work”
• explaining that a work may be “both joint and derivative, with [the original work’s author] owning the copyright in the underlying work . . . and co- owning the copyright in the derivative work”
• applying Massachusetts law of equitable estoppel in state law contract action
• a co-owner of copyright has a duty to account to other co-owners for profits from the use or licensing of the copyright

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).