Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Russian Entertainment Wholesale, Inc. v. Close-Up International, Inc. Case Brief

District Court, E.D. New York2011Docket #2345137
767 F. Supp. 2d 392 Intellectual Property Contracts

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

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A licensee for “multilingual” DVDs, whose subtitles could be turned off, was sued by the exclusive licensee for “Russian-language-only” DVDs. The court held this was not copyright infringement because the defendant operated within its distinct license and any subsequent breach was a contract issue, not a copyright violation.

Legal Significance: This case clarifies that an exclusive licensee may only sue for infringement of the specific right it holds. It also establishes that a licensee’s breach of a contractual covenant, as opposed to a condition, gives rise to a breach of contract claim for the licensor, not a copyright infringement claim.

Russian Entertainment Wholesale, Inc. v. Close-Up International, 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

The copyrights for numerous Russian films were held by Mosfilm and Lenfilm. The studios created two parallel licensing schemes. The plaintiff, Close-Up International, Inc., held an exclusive sublicense to reproduce and distribute “Russian-language-only” DVD versions of the films in the United States. The defendants, the Ruscico defendants, held a separate exclusive license from the same studios to produce and distribute “multilingual versions” of the same films. The defendants’ multilingual DVDs included foreign language subtitles that could be disabled by the viewer, allowing the films to be watched in their original Russian language without subtitles. The defendants’ initial 1999 license did not require a feature to prevent subtitles from being turned off. In 2005, the defendants’ license was amended to add a requirement for a “no shut off” feature. Close-Up sued the Ruscico defendants for copyright infringement, alleging that their DVDs, when viewed with subtitles off, were functionally equivalent to the Russian-language-only versions and thus infringed on Close-Up’s exclusive rights.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a licensee of “multilingual” versions of a copyrighted work infringe the rights of an exclusive licensee of “Russian-language-only” versions when its products are manufactured with subtitles that can be disabled by the end-user?

No, the defendants did not infringe the plaintiff’s copyright. The court held 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 ips

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

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 a licensee of “multilingual” versions of a copyrighted work infringe the rights of an exclusive licensee of “Russian-language-only” versions when its products are manufactured with subtitles that can be disabled by the end-user?

Conclusion

The case reinforces the principle that an exclusive licensee's standing is strictly 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 con

Legal Rule

An exclusive licensee of a particular right under a copyright may only 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 cillu

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on the divisibility of copyright and the interpretation 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 ve

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A licensee with rights to a “multilingual” version of a film
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

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?