IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—S.D. Fla.: Summary judgment denied in Hurricane Dorian video copyright case, (Jan 7, 2026)

By Ravindra Kumar Singh, B.L.

Court finds triable issues on statute of limitations, fair use, and innocent infringement.

The federal district court in Miami, Florida, denied cross-motions for summary judgment in a copyright infringement dispute involving a hurricane disaster video posted on Instagram. The court held that the plaintiff, Global Weather Productions, LLC, established a prima facie case of infringement but that genuine disputes of material fact precluded judgment as a matter of law regarding the defendant’s statute of limitations and fair use defenses, as well as issues relating to damages and intent. The ruling sets the stage for trial (Global Weather Productions, LLC v. Wood Projections, Inc., No. 24-cv-23528 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 5, 2026)).

Background. The plaintiff, Global Weather Productions, LLC (GWP), is a digital media company that licenses footage of extreme weather events for commercial use. GWP was founded by Michael Brandon Clement, a professional storm chaser who documents hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena.

The defendant, Wood Projections, Inc., is a Florida-based for-profit business engaged in manufacturing and selling humidors and woodworking fixtures. It operates an Instagram account under the handle “@woodprojections,” which it uses to showcase products and engage with the public. There is no prior business relationship between the parties.

The work at issue is a video recorded by Clement on September 3, 2019, documenting post-Hurricane Dorian devastation in the Abacos Islands, Bahamas, from a helicopter. The footage was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office on September 25, 2019, under Registration No. PA 2-214-139. GWP, having acquired full rights from Clement, is the registered owner of the video. The video had previously been the subject of a separate copyright lawsuit in 2021 against another party. GWP utilizes Meta Platforms, Inc.’s “Rights Manager” for enforcement on social media platforms.

On September 4, 2019, Wood Projections posted a 36-second excerpt of the video to its Instagram account. The post included an NBC watermark and a caption expressing gratitude that South Florida had been spared the hurricane’s damage. GWP claimed it discovered the post in 2022 and filed suit on September 13, 2024, alleging direct copyright infringement under the Copyright Act. GWP sought partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, asserting that the defendant used the video without authorization. Wood Projections filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, arguing that the claim was time-barred, that the use was protected under the fair use doctrine, and that it qualified as an innocent infringer not liable for statutory damages.

Statute of limitations. The court analyzed the claim under the discovery rule, which provides that a claim accrues when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the infringement. Citing Nealy v. Warner Chappell Music, Inc., 60 F.4th 1325 (11th Cir. 2023), the court held that while the alleged infringement occurred in 2019, a factual dispute existed as to when GWP reasonably should have discovered the use. Clement testified that Rights Manager had been used since 2018 and was “pretty effective,” but also stated that the scale of infringement made detection difficult. The court determined that it could not resolve when the claim accrued without a jury determination.

Fair use defense. The court conducted a four-factor analysis under 17 U.S.C. § 107, analyzing (1) purpose and character of the use, (2) nature of the work, (3) amount and substantiality, and (4) market effect.

Regarding purpose, Wood Projections argued the post was a noncommercial, informational update. GWP countered that the Instagram account served a commercial function and that the caption referenced lost work time, supporting a business motive. The court cited Katz v. Google Inc., 802 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 2015), and found a genuine factual dispute as to whether the use was transformative or commercial. Regarding the nature of the work, the court found the video factual but recognized Clement’s creative choices. While factual works are more amenable to fair use, this factor was not dispositive. Turning to amount and sustainability, the court found that although the excerpt was short, GWP argued it included the “heart” of the work. The court noted this factor is closely tied to the purpose of use and reserved judgment due to factual disputes. Analyzing the market effect, the court emphasized that the burden lay with the defendant to present market evidence. Citing Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994), the court held that Wood Projections failed to demonstrate an absence of market harm and denied summary judgment.

Damages. Wood Projections contended GWP had suffered no actual damages. The court clarified that statutory damages are available under 17 U.S.C. § 504(a), regardless of actual harm. Clement testified to licensing revenue from similar uses, and the court found this sufficient to defeat summary judgment. The defendant’s argument that statutory damages should be unavailable without a computation of actual loss was rejected.

Innocent infringement. The defendant sought a reduction in statutory damages under § 504(c)(2), arguing it had no reason to believe the post infringed copyright and had included an NBC watermark. GWP responded that even if the defendant didn’t know the video belonged to GWP, it clearly belonged to someone. Because the use lacked authorization and the defendant had admitted uncertainty about the source, the court found a triable issue regarding whether the infringement was truly innocent.

Unclean hands and misuse. Wood Projections alleged GWP had unclean hands, claiming it relied on misleading screenshots and used litigation as a revenue strategy. The court, referencing Calloway v. Partners Nat. Health Plans, 986 F.2d 446 (11th Cir. 1993), rejected this argument. It held that disagreements over litigation tactics and damage models did not amount to the type of misconduct required for the equitable defense of unclean hands.

The court also rejected the copyright misuse defense, noting that the Eleventh Circuit has not formally recognized it. Even under doctrines adopted in other circuits, GWP’s enforcement of a lawfully registered work did not constitute misuse, as it was not seeking to extend rights beyond those granted under copyright law.

The Case is No. 1:24-cv-23528-BB.

Judge: Bloom, B.

Attorneys: Joshua Damian Vera (Sanders Law Group) for Global Weather Productions, LLC. Humberto Rubio, Jr. (Law Firm of Rubio & Associates, P.A.) for Wood Projections, Inc.

Companies: Global Weather Productions, LLC; Wood Projections, Inc.

Cases: Copyright FloridaNews