Fioranelli v. CBS Broadcasting Inc.
232 F. Supp. 3d 531
S.D.N.Y.2017Background
- Anthony Fioranelli, a photojournalist, photographed the World Trade Center on 9/11 and registered copyrights in 2014 for a documentary and raw footage (the "9/11 Material").
- In 2002 Fioranelli settled a prior suit with CBS and granted CBS a limited, nonexclusive, perpetual license to use the Footage in CBS news programming; the license expressly excluded CBS Entertainment productions and third‑party productions except under a specific $8,000/minute payment and other conditions.
- Fioranelli alleges that beginning circa 2005–2006 CBS sublicensed the 9/11 Material to at least 15 third parties (the other defendants), resulting in uses beyond the license scope and harm to his business.
- Fioranelli sued for copyright infringement, inducement to infringe, Lanham Act false designation, multiple New York state unfair‑competition and tort claims, unjust enrichment, and breach of contract against CBS (among other claims and defendants).
- Defendants moved to dismiss; the court evaluated whether (a) alleged uses exceeded the license scope so as to support copyright claims, (b) inducement was plausibly pleaded, (c) the Lanham Act claim survived Dastar, and (d) state claims were preempted by the Copyright Act.
- The court denied dismissal of copyright claims, permitted inducement claims only against CBS, BBC, and T3 Media, dismissed the Lanham Act and state law claims as preempted, allowed Fioranelli’s breach of contract claim against CBS to proceed, and held Fioranelli cannot recover statutory damages or fees under 17 U.S.C. §412 for pre‑registration infringements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether uses/sublicenses exceeded CBS's nonexclusive license and support copyright infringement | Fioranelli: the License did not authorize sublicensing to non‑CBS productions; uses to third parties exceeded scope | Defendants: disputes are contract breaches only; license immunizes infringement claims | Held: Allegations plausibly plead uses beyond license scope; copyright infringement claims survive dismissal |
| Whether inducement to infringe is plausibly alleged against all defendants | Fioranelli: CBS and BBC induced others; others participated in chain‑sales | Defendants: inducement requires underlying direct infringement and specific allegations of inducement; many defendants lack such allegations | Held: Inducement plausibly pleaded only as to CBS, BBC, and T3 Media; dismissed as to other defendants |
| Whether Lanham Act §43(a) claim survives where plaintiff alleges misattribution/false designation of origin | Fioranelli: he is the producer of tangible goods (footage) and the Act addresses business harms beyond copyright | Defendants: Dastar bars Lanham Act claims that would protect authorship/origin of expressive works | Held: Dastar controls; Lanham Act claim dismissed as impermissible attempt to extend copyright protection |
| Whether New York state claims (unfair competition, tortious interference, unjust enrichment) survive or are preempted by Copyright Act | Fioranelli: state claims involve extra elements / business harm beyond copying | Defendants: claims concern the copyrighted work and are equivalent to exclusive federal rights | Held: State claims are preempted because they lack qualitatively different extra elements; breach of contract against CBS not dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (standard for pleading plausibility)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility pleading framework)
- Graham v. James, 144 F.3d 229 (2d Cir.) (nonexclusive licensee immunity absent use beyond license)
- Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (Lanham Act protects producer of tangible goods, not author of underlying ideas)
- Forest Park Pictures v. Universal Television Network, Inc., 683 F.3d 424 (2d Cir.) (preemption test under Copyright Act)
- Troll Co. v. Uneeda Doll Co., 483 F.3d 150 (2d Cir.) (statutory damages/fees and pre‑registration infringement rule)