Cambridge University Press v. Becker, 08-CV-1425-ODE (N.D. Ga. 2009)

There was an update last week in Cabridge University Press v. Becker, a case that is to my knowledge the first large-scale infringement suit brought against an institution of higher education.  A group of publishers alleged that Georgia State University facilitated the infringing online distribution of their works.

The plaintiffs made the tactical decision to only seek an injunction and declaratory judgment, not damages.  As a state institution, the publishers are likely barred from seeking money damages against the employees due to sovereign immunity, conferred by the Eleventh Amendment.  We discussed this topic a couple of months ago in Frank Romero v. California Department of Transportation, 2009 WL 650629 (C.D. Cal. 2009) (unpublished). Following the filing of the complaint, Georgia State University adopted a new copyright policy that its counsel argued has rendered moot any claims based on its past-conduct.

At bar, Georgia State University sought a protective order that future discovery should be limited to its “ongoing and continuous conduct.” Plaintiffs argued that further discovery of past practices was releveant because it needed to show infringement to be awarded an injunction, and because it thought that the new copyright policy was inadequate.

Judge Evans granted the Defendant a protective order, finding that the Plaintiffs had conducted sufficient discovery to present evidence of past infringement.

Additional discovery in to these past practices, at this point would be unduly burdensome.  Even if the new copyright policy fails to address the alleged problems in the old policy, Plaintiffs will have had sufficient discovery to argue that there is no significant difference between the two.