Stephen M. Silverman v. Cbs Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the copyrighted radio scripts only protected the “increments of expression” beyond what was contained in the public domain radio scripts
• holding that a mark owner failed to rebut the presumption of abandonment
• noting that presumption of abandonment can be rebutted “by showing reasonable grounds for the suspension and plans to resume use in the reasonably foreseeable future when the conditions requiring suspension abate” 10
• noting that presumption of abandonment can be rebutted \by showing reasonable grounds for the suspension and plans to resume use in the reasonably foreseeable future when the conditions requiring suspension abate\ 10
• noting that “use” means “commercial use”
• “[Copyrights in derivative works secure protection only for the incremental additions of originality contributed by the authors of the derivative works.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).