In an ever-evolving marketplace, we regularly navigate application of the law to emerging technologies as well as shifting business models and consumer behavior. And while we prefer to help our clients avoid the courtroom, we have deep experience in successfully litigating and trying cases.

Our Practice Areas

  • Anti-piracy
  • Anti-counterfeiting
  • Brand protection
  • Content protection
  • Contract, licensing and royalty disputes
  • Copyright
  • DMCA safe-harbors, notices, and subpoenas
  • Fraud and theft protection
  • Gray market goods
  • Off-shore and anonymous infringers
  • Trademark
  • Unfair competition

Notable Matters

  • AAP v. Frosh
    We obtained a preliminary injunction and declaratory judgment for the U.S. publishing industry against the Maryland Attorney General, preventing enforcement of a state-level compulsory license for copyrighted works. The court agreed with our argument that a state statute mandating that publishers license their literary works in digital format to public libraries, and under terms mandated by the state, is invalid, unconstitutional, and federally preempted. The ruling serves as a critical reminder that the nation’s copyright laws are a single federal system, within the exclusive domain of Congress rather than states. (District of Maryland)
  • American Chemical Society v. ResearchGate
    We represented two leading journal publishers, American Chemical Society and Elsevier, in a large-scale, high-profile copyright infringement litigation against ResearchGate, an online social network and file sharing/download service operated from Europe, based on ResearchGate’s unauthorized copying and distribution of peer-reviewed published journal articles. After discovery, the matter was resolved via a settlement and entry of an injunction that requires ResearchGate to take specified steps to prevent unauthorized use of our clients’ copyrighted works. (District of Maryland)
  • Bedford Freeman & Worth v. Shopify
    We represented our long-time educational publishing industry clients, Cengage, Elsevier, Macmillan Learning, McGraw Hill, and Pearson, in litigating claims of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement and contributory trademark infringement against Shopify, an e-Commerce platform, for allegedly assisting and profiting from the sale of pirated copies of eBooks and related teaching and testing materials. The case settled after discovery but prior to trial. (Eastern District of Virginia)
  • Cengage v. Book Dog Books
    We obtained a $34.2 million jury verdict, $5 million fee award, and permanent injunction for our clients Cengage, McGraw-Hill, Pearson, and Wiley against a U.S. commercial distributor for willful trademark and copyright infringement arising from the importation and sale of counterfeit books. (Southern District of New York)
  • Cengage v. Does 1-50 d/b/a Library Genesis
    We are representing several leading educational publishers in a copyright infringement action against one of the world’s largest, most notorious, and far-reaching online infringement operations for distributing pirated copies of books and other literary material. (Southern District of New York)
  • Concord v. Anthropic
    We are representing Universal Music Publishing Group, Concord, and ABKCO in a copyright infringement litigation against Anthropic, an artificial intelligence company, for its unauthorized use and copying of musical compositions with its large language model, Claude. (Middle District of Tennessee)
  • Concord v. X Corp. (f/k/a Twitter)
    We are representing a group of major and independent music publishers in a copyright infringement litigation against X Corp. for its unauthorized use, including streaming, of musical compositions in videos on the Twitter platform. (Middle District of Tennessee)
  • Hachette v. Internet Archive
    We prevailed at summary judgment on behalf of four major book publishers, Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley, in a copyright infringement litigation against Internet Archive over Internet Archive's mass scanning of print books and online distribution of the resulting digital copies. In a powerful opinion, the court rejected Internet Archive’s attempt to justify its conduct, something Internet Archive called “controlled digital lending,” as fair use. Internet Archive has appealed. (Southern District of New York; Second Circuit)
  • Higher Education Publishers’ Anti-Counterfeiting Enforcement
    We successfully represented the nation’s leading educational publishers in numerous litigation and non-litigation enforcement matters against commercial suppliers, importers, and sellers of counterfeits. We also obtained widespread adoption of industry best practices against counterfeiting, see www.stopcounterfeitbooks.com. Litigation venues have included federal district courts in Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
  • Higher Education Publishers’ Online Anti-Piracy Enforcement
    We successfully represented the nation’s leading educational publishers in numerous litigation and non-litigation enforcement matters against hundreds of pirate websites, storefronts, or other illicit online sellers. We have obtained judgments, settlements, TROs, injunctions, asset freezes, and seizures of domain names and financial accounts.
  • Pearson v. Boundless Learning
    We successfully represented Pearson, Cengage, and Macmillan Learning in a copyright and trademark infringement case against an online business for developing and marketing versions of our clients’ leading products. The resolution included a judgment and injunctive relief with damages payments, destruction of offending items, and additional copyright and brand protection. (Southern District of New York)
  • Pearson v. Chegg
    We are representing Pearson in a copyright infringement litigation against Chegg, a technology company that systematically prepares and sells answer sets to textbook questions. (District of New Jersey)
  • Post Foods, LLC v. OK Go Partnership
    We represented the indie rock band OK GO in a declaratory judgment case brought by Post over Post’s use of the OK GO registered mark on a breakfast cereal product. (District of Minnesota)
  • Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox
    We obtained a landmark $1 billion jury verdict against one of the nation’s largest internet service providers (“ISPs”), Cox Communications, on behalf of our long-time music industry clients, Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Warner Music, Universal Music Publishing Group, Sony/ATV, and Warner Chappell. After a three-week trial, the jury found Cox liable for willful contributory and vicarious infringement, for assisting and profiting from its subscribers’ uploading and downloading of copyrighted music through peer-to-peer networks such as Bit-Torrent. The litigation involves over 10,000 copyrights and it was reported as the fifth largest jury verdict in the United States in 2019. It sends an important message to ISPs. While the Fourth Circuit reversed the vicarious liability verdict and remanded for a new trial on damages, it affirmed the jury’s verdict of willful contributory infringement. (Eastern District of Virginia; Fourth Circuit)
  • Sony Music v. Triller
    We successfully represented Sony Music in a copyright infringement and breach of contract action against Triller, a social media and music video app, for its unauthorized use of Sony Music’s copyrighted sound recordings. (Southern District of New York)
  • SoundExchange v. Sirius XM
    We are representing SoundExchange in an action against Sirius XM to recover royalties Sirius XM owes to artists and copyright owners for digitally performing sounding recordings under statutory licenses. (Eastern District of Virginia)
  • UMG v. Bright House Networks
    We represented Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Warner Music, Universal Music Publishing Group, Sony Music Publishing, and Warner Chappell in a copyright infringement litigation against Bright House Networks, an ISP, alleging Bright House assisted its subscribers’ repeated uploading and downloading of copyrighted music through peer-to-peer networks such as Bit-Torrent. The case involved over 7,000 copyrights, and it settled at the start of trial. (Middle District of Florida)
  • UMG v. Frontier Communications
    We are representing Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Warner Records, and ABKCO in a copyright infringement litigation against Frontier Communications, alleging Frontier assisted and profited from its subscribers’ repeated uploading and downloading of copyrighted music through peer-to-peer networks such as Bit-Torrent. (Southern District of New York)
  • UMG v. Internet Archive
    We are representing Universal Music Group, Concord, and Sony Music against the Internet Archive and other defendants in a copyright infringement litigation over the mass copying of physical records into digital files for online distribution and transmission. (Northern District of California)
  • UMG v. Kurbanov
    We successfully litigated copyright infringement and anti-circumvention claims against the owners and operators of two of the most popular “stream-ripping” services in the world, www.FLVTO.biz and www.2conv.com. On behalf of our clients Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Music, we obtained terminating sanctions, injunctive relief, and an $83 million damages award. (Eastern District of Virginia)
  • Warner Records v. Charter Communications
    We represented Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Warner Music, Universal Music Publishing Group, Sony Music Publishing, and Warner Chappell in a copyright infringement litigation against Charter Communications, an ISP, alleging Charter assisted and profited from its subscribers’ repeated uploading and downloading of copyrighted music through peer-to-peer networks such as Bit-Torrent. The case involved over 10,000 copyrights, and it settled after discovery but prior to trial. (District of Colorado)

Our Attorneys' Prior Experience

Our attorneys also have extensive experience prior to joining O+Z. See here for more information.