The doofus who called the police, assuming it MUST be something nefarious going on, didn't contact appt management to see if the person should be in the appt.. That was the initial overreaction. Then when the police got involved; Gung-HO! guns guns guns.
Justice Antonin Scalia said so hardly a year ago. "You are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again," when talking about Korematsu v. United States to some law student at U. Hawaii.
"Clearly there is more than one reasonable interpretation of the language at issue here." That sentence right there tell me we are dealing with an activist judge who disagrees with law-as-written and is trying to legislate from the bench.
So Three's Company was inspired bt a Brit-Com called Man About The House. This makes me wonder if the producers of Three's Company ever sought and secured permission from the holders of the copyright to Man About The House. Or felt/claimed/whatever that Three's Company was /parody/ and/or /transformative/, therefore didnt need to seek permissions.
It would be ironic (and very two-faced) of the producers of Three's Company were that the case.
"... add sufficient originality to a performance..." How to measure 'originality'.. Would each any every person who appears in a movie have their own copyright? all the way down to the extras who are part of a crowd, army, etc?