IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—C.D. Cal.: Japanese art collective’s suit against California-based museum dismissed, (Jul 15, 2022)

By Brian Craig, J.D.

The Japanese art collective failed to show where its works were first published to receive the foreign works exemption of the pre-suit registration requirement.

The federal district court in Los Angeles, California, has concluded that a California-based digital art museum does not infringe copyrights asserted by a Japanese art collective. In granting summary judgment in favor of the Museum of Dream Space, the court concluded that the Japanese art collective failed to present evidence of the publication requirement for the foreign works exemption of the pre-suit registration requirement for copyrights. The Japanese art collective presented insufficient evidence to indicate whether, when, and where its works were first published and thus failed to carry its burden of proof (TeamLab, Inc. v. Museum of Dream Space, LLC, July 12, 2022).

A Japanese interdisciplinary art collective that is internationally known for its digital art exhibits, TeamLab, Inc., sued the owners and operators of a digital art museum located in Beverly Hills California, the Museum of Dream Space, for copyright infringement. The Japanese art collective alleged that the museum infringed copyrights with the 2015 exhibit “Crystal” and the 2017 art exhibit “Boundaries.” The Japanese art collective also argued the museum copied three other works—Forest, Particles, and Wander—on the museum’s various social media accounts. It undisputed that the Japanese art collective never registered any of its works with the U.S. Copyright Office before filing suit. Nearly three years after the case was filed, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment.

Publication requirement. The court concluded that the Japanese art collective failed to satisfy the publication requirement to receive the foreign works exemption of the pre-suit registration requirement for copyrights. To bring a claim for copyright infringement, a copyright claimant generally must comply with the requirement of registration before filing suit for copyright infringement. However, the registration requirement applies to only “United States works.” Foreign works are exempt from the pre-suit copyright registration requirements. Whether a work is a foreign work or United States work is inextricably linked to whether the work is published and, if so, when and where. The court ruled that a published work is a United States work if it was “first published” in the United States or “first published” simultaneously in the United States and abroad. Publication occurs when a work is distributed to the public for sale, leasing, lending, or other comparable transfer of ownership. Additionally, offering to distribute copies to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display, constitutes publication.

Here, the court found that the Japanese art collective presented insufficient evidence to indicate whether, when, and where its works were first published. The court found that the Japanese art collective misunderstood the technical meaning of “publication” under the Copyright Act throughout the case. Despite proffering over 600 purportedly undisputed facts, the Japanese art collective failed to provide sufficient evidence of whether, when, or where its various works were first published even though there is evidence in the record that some or all of works are published. The court could not simply make the inferential leap in the art collective’s favor that evidence of actual licensing deals abroad establishes when and where first publication occurred. Because the Japanese art collective presented insufficient evidence to qualify for the foreign works exempt from the pre-suit registration requirement, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the museum.

The Case is No. 2:19-cv-06906-PSG-GJS.

Attorneys: Benjamin S. Halperin (Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard LLP) for TeamLab Inc. Lawrence M. Hadley (Glaser Weil Fink Howard Avchen & Shapiro LLP) for Museum of Dream Space, LLC and Dahooo American Corp.

Companies: TeamLab Inc.; Museum of Dream Space, LLC; Dahooo American Corp.

Cases: Copyright TechnologyInternet CaliforniaNews