1. How can any state court make conclusions in relation to motion picture rights without referring to the Copyright Act to make a determination?

2. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §301(a), if all legal or equitable rights that a plaintiff asserts under rights that are equivalent those protected within the general scope of copyright as specified by section 106 then

3. How can the State of California stop a Copyright Owner from receiving bi-annual accounting and reporting as legally required by Federal Copyright Law (17 U.S.C §119(b)), and stop him receiving his royalties owed?

4. How can the State of California forfeit a Copyright Owner of his rights pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 106, thus stopping him from exploiting his copyright protected work in the remaining global territories pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 106(3), which is constitutionally protected under The Copyright Act of 1976 and under The Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988?

5. If a c infringes a Copyright protected work as in this case, and precedent cases across all Circuits make the secondary infringer if they "[k]n[e]w, or ha[d] reason to know" of direct infringement, then does this make the State of California and/or the judges involved in the previous hearings ibutory Copyright

How can any state court make conclusions in relation to motion picture rights without referring to the Copyright Act to make a determination?