J.K. Rowling, the author of the successful Harry Potter books and films, and Warner Brothers, which produces and markets Harry Potter movies and products, filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against book publisher RDR Books in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Rowlings and Warner Brothers seek an injunction barring RDR Books from publishing The Harry Potter Lexicon, the print counterpart of the Harry Potter fan website, www.hp-lexicon.com. The website contains information on "the series’ characters, places, animals, magic spells, and potions along with atlases, timelines, and analyses of magical theory," according to a press release issued by Stanford Law School's Fair Use Project, which is acting a co-counsel to RDR Books in the case.

Rowling and Warner Brothers argue that the book, which had been scheduled to be released November 28, 2007, misappropriates elements of Rowling's imaginary world and otherwise violates the plaintiffs' copyright and trademark rights in the books, movies, and related products. RDR argues that it has the right to publish the Lexicon under the fair use doctrine, which is a defense to copyright infringement that permits the use of a copyrighted work without the copyright owner's permission for limited and "transformative" uses that do not damage the market for the original work.

On November 8, 2007, the court issued a temporary restraining order delaying RDR's publication of the book. Both parties agreed to the entry of this order, pending a hearing on a preliminary injunction scheduled for February 6, 2008.

Update:

The court decided to combine the preliminary injunction hearing with a trial on the merits, which is scheduled to begin April 14, 2008.

4/16/2008 - The trial ended, and the court took the matter under advisement.

9/8/2008 - Judge Patterson issued a decision finding the defendants liable for copyright infringement; judge issued permanent injunction and $6,750 in statutory damages.

12/4/08 - RDR Books dismissed its appeal and announced that it will publish a revised version of The Lexicon on on January 12, 2009.  Mr. Vander Ark substantially rewrote the book in an effort to bring it in line with Judge Patterson's decision.  J.K. Rowling's agents issued the following statement:

We are delighted that this matter is finally and favourably resolved and that J.K. Rowling's rights  -- and indeed the rights of all authors of creative works -- have been protected.  We are also pleased to hear that rather than continue to litigate, RDR have themselves decided to publish a different book prepared with reference to Judge Patterson's decision.

Conservative talk show host Michael Savage sued the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in federal district court in California on December 3, 2007 for copyright infringement. He claims that CAIR violated his copyrights in the October 29, 2007 program of the "Michael Savage Show" by excerpting a four-plus minute portion of the show and posting it on CAIR's website. The excerpt was (and remains) attached as an audio file to an article on the website, entitled "National Radio Host Goes On Anti-Muslim Tirade." The article criticizes Savage's comments on the show and calls on "radio listeners of all faiths to contact companies that advertise on Michael Savage's nationally-syndicated radio program to express their concerns about the host's recent anti-Muslim tirade."

The complaint made a number of claims that don't have any immediate relevance to Savage's copyright claim, including that CAIR is a political organization, rather than a charitable or civil rights organization; that CAIR has ties to organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah; and that CAIR used the excerpt from Savage's show out of context, thereby distorting his message and squelching his freedom of speech. The complaint also named 100 anonymous defendants, but it did not make clear what role these defendants had in the alleged copyright infringement.

In his amended complaint and then second amended complaint, Savage also raised a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, relating to CAIR's alleged connections to radical Islamic terrorism.

On January 30, 2008, CAIR filed its answer and moved for judgment on the pleadings, asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit because it was "simply a camouflaged defamation or disparagement claim dressed as bogus copyright and RICO claims...Savage's legal broadside specifically targets CAIR as a civil rights organization and its core political speech responding to and criticizing Savage's inflammatory political rhetoric." (from EFF).

Update:

7/25/08 - The court dismissed the copyright and RICO claims, giving Savage permission to amend the RICO portion of his complaint, but not the copyright portion. 

Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney who operates a blog. On September 17, 2007, Turkewitz used the Avis and Hertz logos in a blog post concerning a federal court decision striking down the "Graves Amendment," a federal law that had abolished vicarious liability for automobile lessors and renters based solely on ownership. On October 23, counsel for Avis posted a comment to Turkewitz's post. The comment asserted that Turkewitz did not have the right to use Avis's trademark and requested that he immediately remove the Avis logo from his blog and refrain from using it in the future.

Turkewitz published a subsequent post explaining his belief that use of the logo was fair and asking his readers for their opinions. He then published a public response to Avis, outlining his argument that use of the logo was protected by the First Amendment as news reporting. At this time, Avis has not taken any legal action.

As of July 7, 2009, it appears that no action has been taken by any of the parties.

Senator John McCain's presidential campaign broadcast an advertisement on television and on McCain's website featuring an eighteen-second video clip excerpted from the GOP presidential debate that had been broadcast on the Fox News Channel the week before.

In the clip, McCain derides democratic rival Senator Hillary Clinton for attempting to earmark $1 million for a Woodstock Museum, commenting that he was "tied up at the time" (referring to the fact that the 1969 festival occurred during his detention in Hanoi as a prisoner of war). The Fox News logo is visible at the bottom left hand corner of the screen in the McCain advertisement.

The advertisement was posted on McCain's website, and was broadcast on television in New Hampshire and during a pre-game show before the World Series baseball game between the Red Sox and the Rockies on October 25, 2007.

Fox News faxed a letter to McCain's campaign on October 25 2007, alleging that the use of the footage infringed Fox News' exclusive rights under section 106 of the Copyright Act. The letter demanded that the McCain campaign stop using the footage in any media, including on the Senator's website.

McCain's campaign has responded with a statement that the use of the short piece of footage constituted fair use and has refused to take the ad down from the Senator's website. Fox News has responded publicly that the use of the footage was not fair use because it was used for a "commercial purpose," namely fundraising.

The repurcussions of this dispute have been widely felt. Fox News sent letters to other Republican presidential hopefuls spelling out its policy that debate footage cannot be used in political advertisements. This has drawn sharp criticism from both ends of the political spectrum, including left-leaning blog Moveon.org and right-leaning blog Redstate.com. Critics point out that NBC, CNN and ABC have agreed to make their debate footage available for re-publication.