McKenna v. Loonan

Background

Joseph McKenna alleged that the defendants infringed his copyright by using or broadcasting a jingle he created in 2013. McKenna alleged that he performed the jingle during a visit to Michael Loonan’s home and that Loonan later supplied it to corporate defendants for use in Minnesota Shower and Bath television commercials.

The opinion identifies the corporate defendants by their correct names as Minnesota Rusco, Inc., doing business as Minnesota Shower and Bath; KSTP-TV, LLC; Fox/UTV Holdings, LLC; Multimedia Holdings Corporation; and CBS Broadcasting Inc. The caption retained the names McKenna used in his complaint. The defendants maintained that the jingle was created by Troy Castellano, and Loonan denied involvement with its creation or use. McKenna proceeded without a lawyer and did not respond to either summary-judgment motion.

Legal Standard

The court explained that summary judgment is proper when the record shows no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The nonmoving party must identify specific evidence supporting a factual dispute rather than rely on allegations or denials. The court stated that it would read McKenna’s filings liberally because he was proceeding without a lawyer.

Corporate Defendants’ Motion

The corporate defendants argued that McKenna’s claim failed because he had not registered the alleged copyrighted material, had not fixed the jingle in a tangible medium, and had not shown that they had access to it.

First, the court held that McKenna could not sue for copyright infringement because he did not allege or present evidence that he had registered or preregistered the jingle with the United States Copyright Office. The court noted that McKenna admitted he had not registered a recording or composition of the jingle.

Second, the court held that McKenna had not shown that the jingle was “fixed,” meaning recorded in a tangible medium from which it could be perceived, reproduced, or communicated. The record contained no evidence that McKenna or anyone else recorded his 2013 performance. The court ruled that this failure independently supported summary judgment.

Third, the court held that McKenna had not shown that the corporate defendants had access to the jingle. Although McKenna’s complaint suggested that Loonan transmitted the performance to them, McKenna presented no evidence explaining how the corporate defendants could have obtained access. The court ruled that a mere possibility of access was insufficient and that McKenna had not shown a reasonable possibility that they viewed or copied his work.

Loonan’s Motion

Loonan incorporated the corporate defendants’ arguments and separately argued that he was not involved with the Minnesota Shower and Bath commercials. The court found that McKenna presented no evidence connecting Loonan to the corporate defendants or to the commercials. For that reason, and for the reasons supporting the corporate defendants’ motion, the court granted Loonan’s motion for summary judgment.

Disposition

The court granted Defendants’ motions for summary judgment, identified as Docket Entries 64 and 73, and ordered that judgment be entered accordingly.