Page 234 |
Previous | 234 of 847 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
210 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS [I9
Recbrds v. Tape Corp.
BALEY, Judge.
The defendants raise three major questions upon this
appeal. First, they contend there are genuine issues as to ma-terial
facts preventing summary judgment upon plaintiff's claim
of unfair competition. Second, they assert that the affirmative
defenses offered in their answer constitute valid legal defenses
to plaintiff's claim, or, at least, present issues of material fact.
Third, they urge that there is no personal liability of the indi-vidual
defendant, J. H. Pettus. The trial court resolved all these
questions in favor of the plaintiff, and we are in accord with
this judgment.
The history of this case reveals that the defendants have
consistently admitted the conduct about which plaintiff com-plains
in its complaint. In the previous appeals to this Court,
defendants conceded, through various affidavits and briefs, that
they were appropriating record performances owned by plaintiff
and reproducing them on magnetic tapes for sale in competition
with the original recordings. Defendants have heretofore taken
the position that such conduct did not amount to unfair com-petition
and, therefore, did not constitute any basis for in-junctive
relief or compensatory damages.
Defendants now contend that despite these admissions
concerning their general business activities, they have not
admitted the appropriation of any particular performance em-bodied
in phonographic recordings which are owned, produced,
and sold by the plaintiff.
The complaint lists particular performances owned by
plaintiff which have been pirated and appropriated by defend-ants.
Affidavits of defense counsel for the injunction hearing
show search of copyright records and payment of royalties upon
specific musical compositions listed by plaintiff and appropriated
by defendants. After the preliminary injunction was obtained,
affidavits of employees of the defendants indicate that the pro-hibited
recording performances owned by plaintiff were elimi-nated
and replaced. It was determined that defendants were
violating the injunction and they were found guilty of contempt.
The material facts are not in dispute. It is clear that defendants
were engaging in pirating activity which involved plaintiff's
property. The exact extent of such activity is for later deter-mination,
but the issue of liability is a proper issue to be
determined by summary judgment.
Object Description
| Title | North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports [v.019, Spring Session 1973 - Fall Session Session 1973] |
| Creator | North Carolina. Court of Appeals. |
| Date | 1974 |
| Subjects | Law reports, digests, etc.--North Carolina; Court records--North Carolina |
| Place | North Carolina, United States |
| Description | Volume 19, Spring Session 1973 - Fall Session Session 1973. Cited as 19 N.C.App. The North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports are the official report of opinions of the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Includes cases and other information about the courts of North Carolina. |
| Publisher | Court of Appeals of North Carolina |
| Agency-Current | North Carolina Court of Appeals, Judicial Department |
| Rights | State Document see http://digital.ncdcr.gov/u?/p249901coll22,63754 |
| Collection | North Carolina State Documents Collection. State Library of North Carolina |
| Type | Text |
| Language | English |
| Format | Reports; Legal documents |
| Digital Characteristics-A | 37.5 MB; 848 p. |
| Serial Title | North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports |
| Digital Collection | North Carolina Digital State Documents Collection |
| Digital Format | application/pdf |
| Pres File Name-M | pubs_serial_courtofappealsreports_vol_019.pdf |
| Pres Local File Path-M | \Preservation_content\StatePubs\pubs_law\images_master\ |
| OCLC Number-Original | 1681248 |
Description
| Title | Page 234 |
| Full Text | 210 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS [I9 Recbrds v. Tape Corp. BALEY, Judge. The defendants raise three major questions upon this appeal. First, they contend there are genuine issues as to ma-terial facts preventing summary judgment upon plaintiff's claim of unfair competition. Second, they assert that the affirmative defenses offered in their answer constitute valid legal defenses to plaintiff's claim, or, at least, present issues of material fact. Third, they urge that there is no personal liability of the indi-vidual defendant, J. H. Pettus. The trial court resolved all these questions in favor of the plaintiff, and we are in accord with this judgment. The history of this case reveals that the defendants have consistently admitted the conduct about which plaintiff com-plains in its complaint. In the previous appeals to this Court, defendants conceded, through various affidavits and briefs, that they were appropriating record performances owned by plaintiff and reproducing them on magnetic tapes for sale in competition with the original recordings. Defendants have heretofore taken the position that such conduct did not amount to unfair com-petition and, therefore, did not constitute any basis for in-junctive relief or compensatory damages. Defendants now contend that despite these admissions concerning their general business activities, they have not admitted the appropriation of any particular performance em-bodied in phonographic recordings which are owned, produced, and sold by the plaintiff. The complaint lists particular performances owned by plaintiff which have been pirated and appropriated by defend-ants. Affidavits of defense counsel for the injunction hearing show search of copyright records and payment of royalties upon specific musical compositions listed by plaintiff and appropriated by defendants. After the preliminary injunction was obtained, affidavits of employees of the defendants indicate that the pro-hibited recording performances owned by plaintiff were elimi-nated and replaced. It was determined that defendants were violating the injunction and they were found guilty of contempt. The material facts are not in dispute. It is clear that defendants were engaging in pirating activity which involved plaintiff's property. The exact extent of such activity is for later deter-mination, but the issue of liability is a proper issue to be determined by summary judgment. |
