Vail (Town) v. Earthscape Play Inc., 2024 FC 1659
Associate Justice Crinson - 2024-10-22
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The Defendant, Earthscape, in this lawsuit alleging Earthscape was infringing copyright has brought this motion for security for costs against the Plaintiff, the Town of Vail. ... According to that Claim, Vail, in connection with its Art in Public Places Program developed and designed Sunbird Park which “integrates original art into a children’s play structure to create an aesthetically pleasing playground”. It is Sunbird Park and its constituent components which are alleged to be the “Copyrighted Works” owned by Vail. ... In the present case there has been no proof of foreign law filed on the motion to establish the process that would need to be followed in Colorado by Earthscape to enforce either an order for costs from this Court, or the binding undertaking that Vail argues would be adequate. Once one of the factors of Rule 416(1) have been satisfied, it is the party seeking to avoid paying security for costs that bears the burden of proving such security is unnecessary. Vail has not met that evidentiary burden in this proceeding and shall be ordered to pay security for costs. ... The preferred and more predictable measure for quantum of security for costs to the end of pleadings in this proceeding is that calculated according to the mid-point of column III of Tariff B of the Rules.
Decision relates to:
- T-1403-24 - Town of Vail v. Earthscape Play Inc.