Defendant carried Plaintiff’s product in its catalog. At some point it dropped Plaintiff’s product, substituted its own, and kept some of Plaintiff’s ad copy. Plaintiff argues that the removal of its name constituted removal of CMI for purposes of the DMCA.
Held: An author’s name can function as CMI (however the court didn’t give examples). In this case, Plaintiff’s name was functioning as its trading name, and not as copyright management information.[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2020/09/fisher-bee-quick-2d-cir-1.pdf” download=”all”]