DOE v. GITHUB Court Filing, retrieved on January 26, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 10 of 21. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IV. ARGUMENT B. The Copyright Act Preempts Several State Law Causes of Action Action. Federal law preempts Plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference in a contractual relationship, unjust enrichment, and unfair competition, and accordingly, provides another basis for dismissal. Preemption under Section 301 of the Copyright Act applies if (1) “the ‘subject matter’ of the state law claim falls within the subject matter of copyright as described in 17 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103” and (2) “whether the rights asserted under state law are equivalent to the rights contained in 17 U.S.C. § 106, which articulates the exclusive rights of copyright holders.” Maloney v. T3Media, Inc., 853 F.3d 1004, 1010 (9th Cir. 2017) (cleaned up). Courts have concluded that the Copyright Act precludes the following: Plaintiffs claim that the OpenAI Entities have “wrongfully interfered with the business interests and expectations of Plaintiffs … by improperly using Copilot to create Derivative Works that compete against” Plaintiffs’ works. (Compl. ¶ 189.) This, in essence, boils down to an allegation that is “not qualitatively different from [a] copyright infringement” claim. • Tortious interference with a contract. See Media.net Advert. FZ-LLC v. NetSeer, Inc., 156 F. Supp. 3d 1052, 1072 (N.D. Cal. 2016) (concluding preemption where plaintiff alleged that defendant directly copied plaintiff’s code to create its own product and “undermined [p]laintiff’s relationship with Microsoft by representing that [its] products could work just as well”). The Copyright Act preempts Plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because the crux of this claim asserts that OpenAI improperly benefitted from using Licensed Materials to create Derivative Works. Del Madera Props. V. Rhodes & Gardner, Inc., 820 F.2d 973, 977 (9th Cir. 1987) (finding preemption because an “implied promise not to use or copy materials within the subject matter of copyright is equivalent” to the Copyright Act’s protections); Firoozye v. Earthlink Network, 153 F. Supp. 2d 1115, 1126 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (finding preemption where plaintiff alleged defendant improperly benefitted from using copyrighted software and “that a contract should be implied in law (e.g., a quasi-contract [] or unjust enrichment claim)”). • Unjust enrichment. . To the extent Plaintiffs’ claims are based on preempted state law claims, the derivative claim must also fail. See Sulit v. Sound Choice Inc., No. C06-00045 MJJ, 2006 WL 8442163, at *7 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2006) (“State law causes of action for unfair competition based on misappropriation of copyrighted material are preempted,” but, where the state claim acts as “a tort of ‘passing off,’ it is not preempted.”). • Unfair Competition Continue Reading . here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:22-cv-06823-JST retrieved on September 8, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. DocumentCloud.org

The DMCA Claims Against OpenAI Should Be Dismissed: Here's Why They Do Not Apply 

OpenAI Claims the Allegations Against Them Fail to Satisfy Requirements - OpenAI Lawsuit Details

Too Long; Didn't Read

Boost your HackerNoon story @ $159.99! 🚀

The Copyright Act Preempts State Law Causes of Action: Why the OpenAI Lawsuit Should Be Dismissed

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

Allegations of Copyright Infringement Against OpenAI, Codex, and GitHub's Copilot

Details of the OpenAI Lawsuit: The Plaintiffs' Fail to Plead a Violation of the CCPA

OpenAI Believes Its Lawsuit Should Be Thrown Out for Failure to State a Claim Under Rule

OpenAI Claims the Allegations Against Them Fail to Satisfy Requirements - OpenAI Lawsuit Details

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

Allegations of Copyright Infringement Against OpenAI, Codex, and GitHub's Copilot

Details of the OpenAI Lawsuit: The Plaintiffs' Fail to Plead a Violation of the CCPA

OpenAI Believes Its Lawsuit Should Be Thrown Out for Failure to State a Claim Under Rule

OpenAI Claims the Allegations Against Them Fail to Satisfy Requirements - OpenAI Lawsuit Details

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps