U.S. Supreme Court,
Civil Litigation,
Intellectual Property
Apr. 17, 2019
Double feature at the US Supreme Court clarifies the copyright litigation landscape
[TOP IP] The high court addressed the "application approach" vs. "registration approach" circuit split in one ruling, then turned to the meaning of "full costs" under the Copyright Act in another.
Ian C. Ballon
Partner
Greenberg Traurig LLP
Phone: (650) 289-7881
Email: ballon@gtlaw.com
Ian defends cybersecurity and data privacy class action suits, among other technology cases, and is co-chair of Greenberg Traurig LLP's Global Intellectual Property & Technology Practice Group and the author of the 5-volume treatise, "E-Commerce & Internet Law" 2d edition (www.ianballon.net). The views expressed are solely those of the author.
Sabina A. Vayner
Of Counsel
Greenberg Traurig LLP
Sabina is a member of the firm's IP & Technology and Entertainment & Media Practice Groups and is co-chair of the Southeast Chapter of the Copyright Society of the USA. She represents brand owners and creators across a broad spectrum of industries in copyright, trademark and advertising litigation, enforcement and counseling matters.
A single interpretation of the Copyright Act by the U.S. Supreme Court is rare enough. Yet in two separate opinions issued on March 4, a unanimous Supreme Court resolved: (1) the long-simmering "application approach" vs. "registration approach" circuit split, holding that a copyright owner must have a registration certificate (or a Copyright Office rejection) in hand before filing suit ($95
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In