Connection lost
Server error
Brilliance Audio, Inc. v. Haights Cross Communications, Inc. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A competitor repackaged a company’s retail audiobooks as library editions for rental. The court held this did not violate copyright law because the rental exception only covers music, but it could be trademark infringement if the repackaged products were materially different or lacked adequate notice.
Legal Significance: Establishes that the Copyright Act’s Record Rental Amendment does not apply to audiobooks. Adopts two key exceptions to the trademark first sale doctrine: the “material difference” and “inadequate notice” exceptions, limiting a reseller’s ability to alter and resell trademarked goods.
Brilliance Audio, Inc. v. Haights Cross Communications, Inc. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Brilliance Audio, Inc. (“Brilliance”) produces and sells audiobooks, holding copyrights in the recordings and rights to the BRILLIANCE trademark. It markets two distinct versions: “retail editions” for public sale and “library editions” for institutional lending. The two editions are packaged and marketed differently. Haights Cross Communications, Inc. (“Haights”), a competitor, purchased Brilliance’s retail editions, repackaged them to resemble Brilliance’s library editions, and then distributed them for commercial rental and lending. Brilliance never authorized this activity. Brilliance alleged that Haights’s repackaging and use of the BRILLIANCE mark on these altered products constituted both copyright infringement, by violating the rental prohibition in 17 U.S.C. § 109(b), and trademark infringement, by creating consumer confusion about the product’s origin and Haights’s affiliation with Brilliance. The district court dismissed all claims under Rule 12(b)(6), finding the first sale doctrine barred both.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Record Rental Amendment’s exception to the copyright first sale doctrine apply to sound recordings of literary works, and do exceptions to the trademark first sale doctrine apply when a competitor repackages and resells trademarked goods?
The dismissal of the copyright claim is affirmed, but the dismissal of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Record Rental Amendment’s exception to the copyright first sale doctrine apply to sound recordings of literary works, and do exceptions to the trademark first sale doctrine apply when a competitor repackages and resells trademarked goods?
Conclusion
This case clarifies the narrow scope of the copyright rental exception, limiting Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex e
Legal Rule
1. The copyright first sale doctrine's rental exception, 17 U.S.C. § 109(b)(1)(A), Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat
Legal Analysis
The court bifurcated its analysis between the copyright and trademark claims. Regarding Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dol
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The copyright first sale doctrine’s “record rental exception” (17 U.S.C. §