被告无法解释盗版蓝图，仍然赢得了

探未来行脚下

[tr=transparent]建筑制图，公司设计的家。在上世纪90年代，BG设计的三计划，后来被卖给其他的建设者。其中两个设计被用来建立一个对房子（每一个设计）在夏洛特地区。该设计也可在线购买“股票”计划。第三设计的计划是出售的脱机使用。三版权所有。

[tr=transparent]Lennar公司建立在18个州的家园。在跳到一个市场，他们进行“尽职调查”近日在该地区新建的家园，其中包括分析平面图，功能和价格。然而，Lennar公司认为它是有限的家庭目前正在建造和销售，没有完成的例子。

[tr=transparent]2001，Lennar雇用制图与设计发展的几层计划在争议的基础上提供的设计。他们声称，他们接到了John Gardner的设计，一个员工想出了一个公司，收购的2000。

[tr=transparent]他们要么错误或撒谎。加德纳得到了一个不同的公司2001，在涉嫌侵权的计划创造了。这是一个事实的不可能性。

[tr=transparent]所以他们发现：无论在FIB或弱点。另外，他们静止[tr]不能提供的家庭起源的一个令人满意的解释。

[tr=transparent]但这是被告人的事，你不一定要。

[tr=transparent]第四电路讨论的意见5-7页深度计划之间的相似之处，但是如果你翻到附录，相似之处是超越明显。它确实显示，Lennar或研发了BG的计划，增加了几英寸，在这里和那里，换了一些微小的细节，和打印。

[tr]出场，然而，是不够的。

[tr]建筑计划被认为是“编辑”受“瘦”的版权保护[tr=transparent]。为了获胜，BG会显示“作品之间的实质相似性”。

[tr]没有直接的证据来；只有旁证。BG首先要表明，Lennar已访问的计划。这要比单纯的猜测和可能性，它必须合理的可能，双方交叉路径[tr]。

[tr]法院援引的例子巴尔的摩乌鸦队的商标诉讼[tr]。艺术家设计的一个标志，把它传给了有人参与运动队到马里兰州，和那个人有建设作为球队老板同一个办公室。最终的标志与该标志。

[tr]在这里，没有这一类东西。我们在这种情况下，唯一的问题是我们所看到的。看到可以欺骗。必须要有更多的。

[tr]BG认为Lennar的“尽职调查”的过程中能够提供他们的访问。然而，只有两个已知的房屋建了三涉嫌侵犯的计划。该计划的有效性，通过各种媒介，也不够。可用性不平等。

正如法院所说，这是“建立在推论的推论…一个可能性的访问。”所以，当BG赢得眼睛测试，Lennar获得版权的测试。

By William Vogeler, Esq. on February 23, 2018 5:56 AM
When you see youngsters racing by on motorcycles, you might wonder if they make it to adulthood.

Chances are they do, but it helps if they have a helmet, boots and other protective clothing. Now think about those kids skimming across the ocean on those water motorcycles.

They may not need helmets, but they definitely need protective wear. Deborah Meek Hickerson didn't think so in Hickerson v. Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A.

Continue reading Court: Manufacturer Not Liable for WaveRunner Injury.
4th Circuit Strikes Travel Ban 3.0 for Discrimination
By William Vogeler, Esq. on February 15, 2018 3:10 PM
President Trump's on-again, off-again travel ban is off again, at least in principle.

The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals said the ban -- the third one -- is unconstitutional. The appeals court said in International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump that the ban wrongfully discriminates against people of Islamic faith.

However, the decision does not supersede the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in December that allowed the ban to stand pending litigation. If you are confused, you may want to get off the bus now because it's headed back to Washington.

Continue reading 4th Circuit Strikes Travel Ban 3.0 for Discrimination.
$18.5M Verdict in Consolidated Mesh Case Upheld on Appeal
By George Khoury, Esq. on February 7, 2018 10:15 AM
The company behind an implantable transvaginal mesh medical device, Boston Scientific Corporation, failed to convince the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that the lower district court helped the jury make the wrong decision.

The appeal was over four cases that were consolidated into one action due to the commonality of the cause of plaintiffs' injuries. The plaintiffs' injuries all involved Boston Scientific's transvaginal mesh implant. Notably, one of the component manufacturers clearly labeled their product in the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) to avoid use in permanent or long term implantable devices. Nevertheless, Boston Scientific used the component, and not surprisingly, many individuals suffered complications as a result.

Continue reading $18.5M Verdict in Consolidated Mesh Case Upheld on Appeal.
FBI Can Use Malware to Track Child Pornography
By George Khoury, Esq. on January 30, 2018 11:15 AM
In a recent ruling from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, some much-needed clarity has been provided regarding the FBI's use of malware to track individuals accused of possession and distribution of child pornography. Notably, the appellate court upheld the use under the good faith exception of the exclusionary rule.

In short, the court found that the officers that sought the warrant allowing the use of the malware pursued the warrant in good faith after consultation with government attorneys and did not make misrepresentations to obtain the warrant. Given these findings, the court ruled that suppressing the evidence obtained was not an appropriate remedy and wouldn't help to deter future repeat conduct by law enforcement.