Ground Zero Museum Workshop v. Wilson, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128054

GZM opened in 2005 displaying 9/11-related photographs and artifacts; Suson is executive director and founder.
Wilson offered website services, helped transfer GZM to A1-Hosting, and later redesigned pages including a donations page.
Tensions arose in summer 2009; Suson and Wilson had heated exchanges over GZM governance and web strategy.
August 10–11, 2009: Wilson resigns, access credentials are changed, and hosting arrangements begin to shift from A1-Hosting to other providers.
Plaintiffs allege Wilson accessed the site without authorization, deleted/modified files, and caused financial/visibility harm; defendants contend changes were authorized or outside GZM's control.
Plaintiffs assert seven counts including DMCA circumvention, CFAA, trespass to chattels, defamation, tortious interference, and DMCA § 512(f) claims; Wilson seeks leave to amend counterclaims seeking co-ownership and proceeds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
DMCA § 1201 circumvention element	Pl. allege unauthorized access after revocation of authorization.	Authorized access persisted; mere use of a password does not constitute circumvention.	Summary judgment for Wilson on DMCA circumvention.
CFAA loss and causation	Plaintiffs incurred over $5,000 in losses due to wilson's actions.	No cognizable loss proven; actions did not cause >=$5,000 in a year.	Judgment for Wilson on CFAA claim.
Trespass to chattels vs. copyright preemption	GZM website was dispossessed/impacted; claim not preempted.	Trespass to chattels not preempted; no equivalent rights asserted.	Not preempted; fact finder could determine dispossession; partial denial of summary judgment on this count.
Defamation law governing multistate statements	Statements about Suson and GZM published to third parties in NY and elsewhere are defamatory.	Statements are opinions or true/privileged; New York law applies with Restatement § 150 factors.	New York law governs; defamation counts dismissed under NL privileges and lack of falsity.
Leave to amend counterclaims	Counterclaims should be dismissed; amendments would prejudice plaintiffs.	Good cause exists; discovery revealed new theories; amendment warranted.	Leave to amend granted.

Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001) (DMCA framework and access control context)
Chamberlain Grp. v. Skylink Techs., Inc., 381 F.3d 1178 (Fed.Cir. 2004) (circumvention requires unauthorized access to be proven)
I.M.S. Inquiry Mgmt. Sys. v. Berkshire Info. Sys., 307 F. Supp. 2d 521 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (password use alone not circumvention under DMCA)
Rosciszewski v. Arete Assocs., 1 F.3d 225 (4th Cir. 1993) (test for preemption analysis in tort vs. copyright)
Reeves v. American Broadcasting Cos., 719 F.2d 602 (2d Cir. 1983) (factors for Restatement § 150 multistate defamation)
Abadian v. Lee, 117 F. Supp. 2d 481 (D. Md. 2000) (Restatement approach to defamation choice of law)
Liddy v. Liddy, 186 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 1999) (multistate defamation harm location considerations)
Berge v. Bd. of Trs., 104 F.3d 1453 (4th Cir. 1997) (preemption of conversion when tangible property is involved)