Changes

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.  

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.

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.