Universal Furniture International, Inc. v. Collezione Europa USA, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the district court “would have erred had it found similarity only in the collection’s noneopyrightable features”
• noting that the extrinsic test pertains only to the “copyrightable aspects” of a work
• “The extrinsic inquiry is an objective one on which expert testimony may be relevant.”
• “Since North Carolina’s [UDTPA] prohibits the same type of activity that the Lanham Act prohibits in this case, the court finds that Defendant has violated the [UDTPA].” (citing Polo Fashions, Inc. v. Craftex, Inc., 816 F.2d 145, 149 (4th Cir. N.C. 1987)
• applying the two-part substantial similarity test to architectural works
• “expert testimony may be relevant” to extrinsic similarity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).