In an article published in the World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR) on September 25, 2017, it was reported that a copyright infringement claim made against Curtis Jackson (a.k.a. 50 Cent) and Starz[1] was recently dismissed by a U.S. District Court judge because the claimant, “…had not met the pleading burden of showing “ ‘more than a bare possibility that defendants had access…’ ” to the claimant’s manuscript.

As an private investigation firm, we, of course, cannot speak to the merits of any particular copyright infringement claim, but there are two common themes that come up time and time again whenever we are called in by a media-defendant to look into the claimant’s background: 1) The claimant has no significant production credits, and, 2) The claimant is broke.

Of course, being broke and having no significant production credits (at the time of the claim) does not automatically discredit one’s claim, but for media companies—often faced with having to defend itself against disingenuous claims—it could shed some light on what is truly motivating the claimant.

[1] Judge Dismisses Copyright Suit Against 50 Cent

http://www.worldipreview.com/news/judge-dismisses-copyright-suit-against-50-cent-14646?utm_source=World+IP+Review&utm_campaign=93cc4f7c59-WIPR_Digital_Newsletter_15_09_2017&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d76dcadc01-93cc4f7c59-27497777