Fonovisa, Inc. v. Cherry Auction, Inc. Richard Pilegard, W.D. Mitchell, Margaret Mitchell Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
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.
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
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
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