United States Fourth Circuit

In a copyright suit between competing furniture companies, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in concluding that plaintiff established its ownership of the asserted copyrights; 2) because the designs are original and conceptually separable from the utilitarian aspect of the furniture, the compilation design elements of plaintiff's two furniture lines are entitled to copyright protection; 3) district court did not err in determining that most of defendant's redesigns infringed plaintiff's copyrights; 4) district court's ruling that defendant violated the Lanham Act is affirmed as by displaying plaintiff's furniture as its own for a lower price, defendant appears to have retained customers that would have otherwise purchased form plaintiff; 5) district court's ruling that defendant contravened the UDTPA is affirmed ; and 6) district court's award of more than $11 million to plaintiff in damages is affirmed.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/02/2009
• Decided 08/20/2010
• Published 08/20/2010

Judges

• Array

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Nicholas Mesiti, William M. Bryner