Difference between revisions of "Compaq Computer Corp. v. Ergonome Inc."
m (link to de-orphan) |
DavidB4-bot (talk | contribs) (→top: clean up & uniformity) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Chief Judge [[Edith Jones]] wrote the opinion for the [[Fifth Circuit]]. | Chief Judge [[Edith Jones]] wrote the opinion for the [[Fifth Circuit]]. | ||
[[Category:Circuit Cases]] | [[Category:Circuit Cases]] | ||
| − | [[ | + | [[Category:Fifth Circuit]] |
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Copyright]] |
Revision as of 06:37, July 13, 2016
In Compaq Computer Corp. v. Ergonome Inc., 387 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2004), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict in favor of a defendant in a copyright case. The trial court had held that any copying by Compaq was was de minimis and constituted fair use according to 17 U.S.C. § 107, and that doctrines of laches and equitable estoppel also barred Ergonome's claim.
The Fifth Circuit also affirmed an award to Compaq of attorneys' fees of $2.7 million partly as a sanction for unjustified litigation tactics, and held that an individual was liable as the alter ego of Ergonome as a sanction for repeated discovery violations throughout the litigation process.
Chief Judge Edith Jones wrote the opinion for the Fifth Circuit.