Leonie Brinkema

“ In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work. ”

“ This approach would permit a would-be infringer to participate in blatant theft of a copyright yet still escape punishment via the subsequent posting of subsequent commentary -- a commentary that may not always be seen in tandem with the infringing work. Under this argument “cyberbandits” could easily cover their tracks.
The third fair use factor therefore weighs heavily against Lerma. His direct copying and posting of certain “single works” registered within collections, almost totally devoid of discussion and commentary, nearly are sufficient to preclude a fair use defense. ”

“ This court declines to impose increased statutory damages for a willful violation. “An infringement is 'willful' if the infringer knows that its conduct is an infringement or if the infringer has acted in reckless disregard of the copyright owner's right.” ”

“ When judged by these factors, we find that the Works at issue in this case are combined in “collections” and that each subpart must be considered a “single work” for the purposes of fair use analysis.
Courts have followed this approach and found that components of a “collection” constitute single works for fair use purposes. In Szabo v. Errison, 68 F.3d 940 (5th Cir. 1995) , the court granted copyright protection to the component elements of a collection of recordings despite the fact that the elements were not individually listed on the copyright registration. ”

“ Thus, while the factual nature of the Works weighs in Lerma's favor, the unpublished nature of the Works and RTC's intention to keep the Works unpublished weigh against him. As held in Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 564, “ [t] he fact that a work is unpublished is a critical element of its 'nature.”' Unpublished works “normally enjoy complete protection against copying any protected expression.” ”

“ The basis for monetary damages in an infringement action is set forth in 17 U.S.C. § 594. That section enables a copyright owner to seek either “actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer” or “statutory damages.” 17 U.S.C. §504 (a) .
Actual damages and profits are not readily ascertainable in this case because of a number of factors, including that Lerma was not selling the infringed material, that he is not a direct competitor of the Church of Scientology, and that RTC is unable to show lost profits or fewer parishioners with any degree of certainty. ”

“ Under this “merger doctrine,” where the author's ideas and procedures can be properly expressed in so few ways that “protection of the expression would effectively accord protection to the idea itself,” Kregos v. Associated Press, 937 F.2d 700, 705 (2nd Cir. 1991) , courts have found the expression not copyrightable. Copyrighting the expression in these instances would effectively prohibit discussion and analysis of the idea itself and grant the owner a monopoly on all uses of the very concept. ”

“ If 60% of an RTC copyrighted document is copied to form 100% of a Lerma document, without any change or commentary whatsoever, this still does not constitute fair use.
Number of Infringing Acts -- Although each of the 33 binders contained in RTC's G-Series Exhibits are infringing, this does not necessarily indicate 33 acts of infringement. The Copyright Act clearly states that for purposes of calculating statutory damages for copyright infringement, “all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.” ”

“ The 33 exhibits in RTC's G-Series Exhibits indicate extensive copying and posting. A majority of these 33 exhibits contain vertabim copying, as if Lerma obtained the copyrighted materials and summarily transferred them into cyberspace. In many cases, Lerma uploaded a complete, self-contained OT Document with a recognizable beginning, body, and end. Over two-thirds of the G-Series Exhibits represent virtually a total reproduction of the work on file at the Copyright Office.
The wholesale copying of copyrighted material often precludes the application of the fair use doctrine. ”

“ Rowley, 695 F.2d 1171, 1176 (9th Cir. 1983) (“ [W] holesale copying of copyrighted material precludes application of the fair use doctrine.”) , 3 Nimmer § 13.05 [A] [3] (1996) (“ [Generally] it may not constitute a fair use if the entire work is reproduced”) .
Lerma argues that his “research” conducted via downloads from newsgroups on the Internet provides a particularly strong argument for fair use. ”

“ Founded by L. Ron Hubbard, the Scientology religion attempts to explain the origin of negative spiritual forces in the world and advances techniques for improving one's own spiritual well-being. Scientologists believe that most human problems can be traced to lingering spirits of an extraterrestrial people massacred by their ruler, Xenu, over 75 million years ago. ”

“ United Tel. Co. of Mo. v. Johnson Pub. Co., Inc., 855 F.2d 604 (8th Cir. 1988) (alleged misuse by requiring that plaintiff purchase entire customer list rather than the copyrighted subset requested by plaintiff) . As these cases demonstrate, misuse is somewhat analogous to the prohibition against “tying” in patent law. ”

“ While such creations may contain “procedure [s] , process [es] , [or] system [s] ”, 17 U.S.C.A. §102 (b) , they are not thereby rendered de facto uncopyrightable. As an example, RTC cites programs which essentially describe a “process” but are nonetheless copyrightable. ”

“ Lerma correctly argues that any economic harm befalling the Church of Scientology as a result of legitimate commentary is permissible under the fair use doctrine. The Supreme Court found in Campbell v. ”

“ Upon further analysis, the Court no longer requires additional argument regarding statutory damages. Supplemental briefs pertaining solely to the award of attorney's fees shall be submitted within 11 days of this Memorandum Opinion.↑ See Plaintiff RTC's Motion for Summary Judgment for Copyright Infringement Against Defendant Lerma, p. 46, n. 40. ”