> I don't know why this isn't a criminal copyright violation that the FBI should investigate.
The existence of the contract is uncontested (though its effect clearly is contested), so its clearly a breach of contract case. I think it is pretty well established that at least for civil litigation between the parties, the existence of a contract license covering the work generally requires the aggrieved party to proceed under contract law, not bare copyright law. It is at least reasonably consistent that the same should bar criminal copyright action, as well.
The existence of the contract is uncontested (though its effect clearly is contested), so its clearly a breach of contract case. I think it is pretty well established that at least for civil litigation between the parties, the existence of a contract license covering the work generally requires the aggrieved party to proceed under contract law, not bare copyright law. It is at least reasonably consistent that the same should bar criminal copyright action, as well.