Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the plaintiff, an online contextual-advertising service provider, alleges that the defendant, a competitor, unlawfully copied significant portions of its HTML code to create a similar search results page. The court addresses the plaintiff's second amended complaint, which reasserts claims of copyright infringement and unfair competition under California Business Professions Code § 17200. The court partially grants the defendant's motion to dismiss, finding the copyright claims inadequately pled due to a lack of specificity in identifying the infringed code, and dismisses the § 17200 claim as preempted by the Copyright Act. The plaintiff's claims fail to meet the specificity required under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and relevant case law standards. The court denies the defendant's motion to strike allegations related to the 'look and feel' of the website, deeming them relevant for context. Ultimately, the court limits the copyright claims to those specifically identified by the plaintiff and dismisses the unfair competition claim with prejudice, concluding that it is preempted by federal law, as it mirrors the copyright infringement claim without adding distinct elements.
Legal Issues Addressed
Copyrightability of HTML Codesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determines that only specific parts of the plaintiff's HTML code are copyrightable, specifically the 'classes' and 'comments,' rejecting broader claims of copyrightability.
Reasoning: The Court reiterates its previous ruling that only the 'classes' and 'comments' within HTML code are copyrightable, rejecting the Plaintiff's broader claim that the entire HTML code is copyrightable.
Dismissal Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court partially grants the defendant's motion to dismiss based on the plaintiff's failure to adequately state a claim for copyright infringement and unfair competition.
Reasoning: Defendant seeks to dismiss the newly pled copyright infringement and § 17200 claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows for dismissal based on a failure to adequately state a claim.
Motion to Strike Allegationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denies the defendant's motion to strike allegations concerning the 'look and feel' of the plaintiff's website, finding them relevant as background information.
Reasoning: In addressing Defendant's motion to strike allegations related to the 'look and feel' of Plaintiff's website, the Court notes that although these aspects are not copyrightable, they retain relevance as background information.
Pleading Standards under Federal Rules of Civil Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court dismisses the plaintiff's claims for lack of specificity and failure to meet the pleading standards, emphasizing the need for specific allegations.
Reasoning: Plaintiff's claims of misrepresentation against Defendant lack specificity, particularly regarding any broader misrepresentation beyond the alleged theft of Plaintiff's code.
Preemption by the Copyright Actsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court finds that the plaintiff's unfair competition claim under California Business Professions Code § 17200 is preempted by the Copyright Act, as it does not differ qualitatively from a copyright infringement claim.
Reasoning: The Court agrees with Defendant's argument that the claim under California's § 17200 is preempted by federal copyright law, citing 17 U.S.C. § 301(a), which restricts state law claims that are equivalent to rights protected under the Copyright Act.