Connection lost
Server error
Fonovisa, Inc. v. Cherry Auction, Inc. Richard Pilegard, W.D. Mitchell, Margaret Mitchell 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 swap meet operator was sued for infringement by its vendors. The court found the operator could be held secondarily liable for copyright and trademark infringement because it controlled the premises and financially benefited from the infringing sales, reversing a lower court’s dismissal.
Legal Significance: This case established that operators of physical marketplaces can be held vicariously and contributorily liable for copyright and trademark infringement by third-party vendors. Its reasoning became a key precedent for cases involving online marketplace liability.
Fonovisa, Inc. v. Cherry Auction, Inc. Richard Pilegard, W.D. Mitchell, Margaret Mitchell 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
Fonovisa, Inc., a music company, owned copyrights and trademarks for Latin music recordings. Defendant Cherry Auction, Inc. operated a swap meet where third-party vendors, who paid a daily rental fee, sold counterfeit Fonovisa recordings. Cherry Auction also charged customers admission fees, parking fees, and provided other services. The Fresno County Sheriff’s Department had previously raided the swap meet, seized thousands of counterfeit recordings, and formally notified Cherry Auction of the ongoing infringing activity. Fonovisa’s own investigator later confirmed the continued sales. Cherry Auction’s rules gave it the right to terminate any vendor at any time for any reason. Fonovisa sued Cherry Auction, alleging vicarious and contributory copyright infringement, and contributory trademark infringement. The district court granted Cherry Auction’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, reasoning that a swap meet operator is akin to a landlord and cannot be held liable for the infringing acts of its tenants. Fonovisa appealed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can the operator of a swap meet be held secondarily liable for copyright and trademark infringement committed by vendors on its premises when the operator has knowledge of the infringement, the ability to control the vendors, and derives a direct financial benefit from their activities?
Yes. The court reversed the dismissal, holding that Fonovisa had sufficiently pleaded 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 ipsu
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
Can the operator of a swap meet be held secondarily liable for copyright and trademark infringement committed by vendors on its premises when the operator has knowledge of the infringement, the ability to control the vendors, and derives a direct financial benefit from their activities?
Conclusion
This decision significantly expanded secondary liability for intellectual property infringement to the 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
Legal Rule
For vicarious copyright infringement, a defendant is liable if it has (1) 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
Legal Analysis
The Ninth Circuit rejected the district court's analogy of Cherry Auction to 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 dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatu
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A swap meet operator can be held secondarily liable for copyright