Apple can’t avoid ‘Austin Powers’ copyright suit
A New York court says that Apple will have to face a copyright lawsuit from the copyright owner of the film “Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery”.
Ralf Hartmann claims that Apple violated his copyright and international distribution rights by reproducing “Austin Powers” and another film “After Rain” on the iTunes Store in the US and over 175 other countries.
According to an order handed down on Monday, 20 September, Hartmann managed to persuade US District Court for the Southern District of New York judge Gregory Woods that he owns valid copyrights of “Austin Powers” and “After the Rain”, and has the right to bring a direct copyright infringement claim against Apple.
But the judge said that Hartmann failed to show how Apple should have been aware of his copyright ownership, as the company would have to have investigated the metadata of the films in order to know this.
The court also stated that Hartmann “failed to identify a single specific foreign copyright law that Apple allegedly violated”.
As a result, Apple will go to trial for alleged direct copyright infringement, but Hartmann’s contributory and foreign copyright claims will be dropped from the proceedings.
Proving ownership
While the rights to both of the films were originally held by Erste and Cappella International, the companies entered into a written agreement to assign the rights to Cappella Films in 2007, according to the order.
In January 2008, Cappella entered into a written agreement to assign their right, title and interest in the films to Hartmann.
Starting July 2017, Hartman alleged that both films were reproduced and distributed on the iTunes store without Hartmann’s authorisation.
Hartmann filed a complaint with the New York Court in August 2020 and an amended complaint in October following challenges from Apple.
Apple then moved to dismiss the amended complaint on December 18 2020, prompting Hartmann to file a second amended complaint on January 15, 2021. Which Apple moved to dismiss again.
Now, Hartmann’s second amended complaint has survived dismissal, but will only be allowed to proceed to trial alleging direct copyright infringement.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox
Already registered?
Login to your account
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk