This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

In 1989, D began negotiations to purchase WNFT-TV in Jacksonville, Florida. D instructed Dan Dayton, his Chief Operating Officer, to negotiate with all of the syndicators supplying programs to WNFT to see if they would be willing to restructure the license agreements. Dayton contacted P, who indicated that Pa would 'work with' D to restructure the deal. Dayton memorialized this conversation in a March 22, 1990 letter. D purchased WNFT, as well as stations WABM-TV in Birmingham, Alabama, and WTVX-TV in West Palm Beach, Florida. From March 1990 until December 1991, P and D engaged in protracted negotiations for the restructuring of each of the three stations' debt to P. At least thirteen written proposals were exchanged. P insisted upon a large up-front payment and refused to spread out the payments over the entire term of the contract notwithstanding D's protests that the stations were not earning enough money to make those payments. On July 8, 1991, D sent the first of three termination letters. D made no attempts to enforce the letter's demands and sent three more restructuring proposals in September and October of 1991. On October 17, 1991, D sent another termination letter similar to the letter of July 8. Like the July 8 letter, the October 17 letter was subsequently contradicted by a restructure proposal sent on December 10, 1991. Based on these facts, D argues that a triable issue of fact exists as to whether he should have reasonably interpreted P's conduct to effectuate a termination of the licensing agreements. P had licensed several television shows including 'Who's the Boss?,' 'Silver Spoons,' 'Hart to Hart,' and 'T.J. Hooker.' P terminated the licensing agreements. The stations continued to broadcast the programs. P filed suit, alleging copyright infringement. The court found D vicariously and contributorily liable for copyright infringement, granted summary judgment in favor of P on liability, and, after a bench trial, awarded Columbia $8,800,000 in statutory damages and over $750,000 in attorney’s fees and costs. D appealed. D argued in part that: (1) the television stations should be considered a single infringer rather than treated as separate infringers, and (2) damages should be awarded only for each series, not for the individual episodes of each series.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.