Venetian triumphs in lawsuit over light fixtures

Friday, Oct. 9, 2009 | 11:07 a.m.

Courtesy Duane Morris LLP

A Venetian light fixtures at issue in the case.

The Venetian casino-resort on the Las Vegas Strip has prevailed in a two-year-old lawsuit accusing it of violating copyright law by allegedly stealing a San Francisco firm's design for thousands of light fixtures used in a room remodeling project.

Jonathan Browning Inc. filed suit against the resort in federal court in California in August 2007.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White, in dismissing the case Tuesday, noted that the U.S. Copyright Office had "refused the registration for the two light fixtures designed by plaintiff as useful articles not having any separable features that are copyrightable."

"This court owes such a determination deference and also finds that the subject sconces do not contain any separable features that are copyrightable," White wrote in his ruling.

Browning's suit charged that in 2006 the Venetian asked the company to bid on a project to provide more than 11,000 wall-mounted sconces, or fixtures, to be used in the resort's guest rooms and corridors.

Browning said it sold 10 samples to the resort -- priced at $2,790 to $3,490 apiece -- to be used in a mock up and that Browning submitted a bid to provide the sconces at a discounted price.

"The Venetian declined the bid, stating that the price was too high. The Venetian showed no interest in negotiating," the lawsuit charged. "In fact, the Venetian then proceeded to copy, or had others copy, the design on the sample Jonathan Browning sconces.

"The Venetian has made and installed in its guest rooms and corridors literally thousands of illegal copies of Jonathan Browning's sconces ... The Venetian paid Jonathan Browning nothing for the designs it copied. Rather, the Venetian simply ripped off Jonathan Browning's designs from the samples provided."

Jonathan Browning, who owns the company, said in the lawsuit that he is a prominent designer whose work has been featured in such publications as Forbes FYI and Architectural Record.

As a former senior vice president of design for Starwood Hotels and Resorts, he said he was surprised at the Venetian's lack of interest in negotiating the price since "it was standard industry practice to negotiate when price is truly the basis for rejecting an initial bid."

He charged the Venetian used "deceptive and unfair means" to learn the identity of Browning's contract manufacturing plant in China and then had that plant make "more than 13,000 nearly identical copies of the sconces."

But the Venetian and its owner Las Vegas Sands Corp., represented by attorneys with the firm Duane Morris LLP, argued that Browning's suit sought a "monopoly" on fixtures "comprised of an unoriginal combination of pre-existing features that have been in existence for centuries."

The Venetian argued Browning had the burden of proving the Venetian copied the Browning fixtures and could not do so because the fixtures were not manufactured by the hotel-casino.

"The undisputed evidence shows that the light fixtures at issue were manufactured by (Chinese manufacturer) Diamond Life -- not the Venetian. The Copyright Act does not render anyone directly liable for infringement committed by another," the attorneys argued in their successful motion for summary judgment.

The Venetian attorneys also argued that the infringement claim should be rejected because it failed to show the light fixtures were subject to public display.

The Venetian said the fixtures, which were also used in Las Vegas Sands' adjacent Palazzo resort, were not publicly displayed because they are in non-public hotel rooms and corridors.

Discussion: 6 comments so far…

By smokininkman

10/9/09 at 12:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

"Browning said it sold 10 samples to the resort -- priced at $2,790 to $3,490 apiece --"
"The Venetian paid Jonathan Browning nothing for the designs it copied"

No offense, but if they paid that man even the low end of $2790 for each of 10 sconces, he was a rip off. What are they, Gold plated?. Is his name worth that much for such a simple light fixture, which is not particularly unique?
Then again, he should have been smart enough to trademark the design in the first place. By not doing so, he left himself open, and even then, all they would have had to do was make a simple little change in the design, and they wouldn't be breaking the copyright.
I guess it's another case of the rich getting richer because they can afford better lawyers!
By spartacus84

10/9/09 at 12:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

I guess I'd need to see the SF fixture before deciding, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Venetian had someone copy the fixtures for a fraction of the cost. What else would you expect from a city that has a fake Eiffel Tower, Statue of Liberty and man-made canals?
By artswanson

10/9/09 at 1:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Havent the goiyum figured out by now that you dont mess with the Zohan!
By onerare1

10/9/09 at 2:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

If browning was the vice president of design for stawood then he should have know better than to send them 10 samples in the first place w/o adding some conditions to the sale. come on, Hotels knock of things all the time to bring down the prices. furniture, carpet wallcover, everything is fair game in the industry.
By vc

10/9/09 at 3:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

I have seen the Jonathan Browning sconce and it is similar but not an exact knock off. His was way nicer. But definitely not worth the money he was asking.
By GrandmaCrabby

10/9/09 at 10:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Seriously, he got something in the neighborhood of $30,000 for his original 10 fixtures. He's not starving. Pay me 30 grand and I'll give you 20 light fixtures.

From the story it sounds like he knew his bid was unreasonably high. He thought he could negotitate down from there, but when you insult somebody with a bid that's nowhere near market, they rule you out. He tried to milk them for way too much and he lost out on the contract. Maybe next time he should submit a realistic bid that might get accepted. Live and learn.