International, Inc., 991 F.2d 426, 428-29 (8th Cir.1993), the Eighth Circuit held that a state cause of action is preempted by the Copyright Act when “(1) the work at issue is within the subject matter of copyright as defined in §§ 102 and 103 of the Copyright Act, and (2) the state law created right is equivalent to any of the exclusive rights within the general scope of copyright as specified in § 106.” (citing Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 723 F.2d 195, 200 (2d Cir. 1983)). Thus, for copyright preemption to apply not only must the subject matter at issue be within the subject matter of copyright, but the right sought under state law must be equivalent to the exclusive rights under the scope of copyright. See e.g., National Car Rental, 991 F.2d at 428-29 (<HOLDING>). The court will, therefore, first consider
holding that a plaintiff may recover damages under both the lanham act and the copyright act provided the copyright damages serve a purpose other than compensation recognizing that copyright offices interpretation of copyright act should ordinarily receive deference holding that the copyright act distinguishes between employees and independent contractors for copyright possession holding that conversion and unjust enrichment claims were preempted by the copyright act since they were not qualitatively different from a copyright claim because they contained no extra element beyond those necessary to show copyright infringement holding that while the computer program at issue was within the subject matter of copyright the right sought under state law pursuant to a license was not equivalent to the exclusive rights under copyright as such copyright preemption did not apply