Schatten v. Weichert Realtors, Inc.

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 rights in § 106 are divisible and can therefore each be separately conferred to a different person
• declining to consider a document produced “for the first time in response to [a] motion for summary judgment”
• distinguishing between exclusive and non- exclusive licensees for purposes of who may bring an infringement action under 17 U.S.C. § 501(b)
• \ Crown Die suggests to us that the realm of intellectual property law has special characteristics that place it outside of any generally permissive regime for the assignment of federal claims.\
• paradigmatic example of beneficial ownership is “an author who had parted with legal title to the copyright in exchange for percentage royalties based on sales or license fees”
• “[A]n exclusive licensee is a ‘legal owner’ of an exclusive right for purposes of a copyright infringement action under section 501(b) whereas a non-exclusive licensee is not.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).