## Facts

- Frederick E. Bouchat, an amateur artist, created a “winged shield” drawing as a proposed logo for Baltimore’s new NFL team.
- Bouchat faxed the drawing to the Maryland Stadium Authority with a request for recognition and an autographed helmet if the design was used.
- Graphic artists engaged by National Football League Properties, Inc. (NFLP) later created the Ravens’ “Flying B” logo, which a jury found infringed Bouchat’s copyrighted drawing.
- The Ravens used the Flying B logo as a primary symbol on helmets, uniforms, field markings, tickets, banners, and licensed merchandise from 1996 to 1998.
- In an earlier appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the liability verdict for copyright infringement.
- The district court bifurcated proceedings and conducted a separate damages trial focused on recovery of infringers’ profits under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b).
- During the profits phase, the district court excluded certain categories of defendants’ revenues from the jury’s consideration and instructed the jury on apportionment.
- The jury awarded Bouchat no portion of the Ravens’ or NFLP’s profits.

## Issues

1. Whether 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) entitled the plaintiff to a presumption that all of the Ravens’ and NFLP’s revenues were attributable to the infringing logo once gross revenues were shown.
2. Whether the district court erred by excluding entire revenue streams (including certain ticket-related revenues and licensing minimum guarantees) from the jury’s profits calculation.
3. Whether the district court’s evidentiary rulings and jury instructions improperly constrained proof of profits attributable to the infringement under § 504(b).

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment for the Ravens and NFLP.
- The court held that § 504(b) does not give a plaintiff a blanket presumption that all revenues of a multi-revenue business are attributable to infringement.
- The court upheld limiting “gross revenue” to revenue streams reasonably related to the infringement and excluding categories deemed too attenuated.
- The court held the jury was permitted to award zero profits where the evidence supported a finding that no profits were attributable to the infringement.
- The court found no reversible error in the district court’s control of expert testimony and other evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b), a copyright owner may recover only those profits “attributable to the infringement.”
- The plaintiff’s initial burden is to present the infringer’s gross revenues that bear a reasonable relationship to the infringement; the statute does not place every revenue stream of a diversified enterprise into issue.
- Once relevant gross revenues are shown, the infringer bears the burden to prove deductible expenses and the portion of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.
- Profit recovery under § 504(b) requires a causal, non-speculative connection between the infringement and the claimed profits.
- A jury may permissibly find zero profits attributable to the infringement when the record supports that conclusion.
- Trial courts have discretion to limit evidence, including expert testimony, to prevent speculative profit theories and to manage probative value versus potential prejudice.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit affirmed a zero-profit verdict, holding that § 504(b) requires the plaintiff to identify revenue streams reasonably connected to the infringement and permits exclusion of attenuated revenues; without non-speculative proof that profits were attributable to the infringing logo, a jury may award no infringer’s profits.


Bouchat v. Balt. Ravens Football Club, Inc., 346 F.3d 514 (4th Cir. 2003)