Issuing its second decision in Supap Kirtsaeng's long-standing dispute with John Wiley & Sons ' and its first copyright decision in nearly two years ' the U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified the applicable standard for evaluating the appropriateness of an attorney's fee award under Section 505 of the Copyright Act, holding that a district court should give substantial weight to the objective reasonableness of the losing party's position, while also taking into consideration all other circumstances relevant to the attorney's fees inquiry.
<i>Kirtsaeng</i> Clarifies Attorney's Fees Standard In Copyright Cases, Injects More Uncertainty Into Availability of Fee Awards
Issuing its second decision in Supap Kirtsaeng's long-standing dispute with John Wiley & Sons ' and its first copyright decision in nearly two years ' the SCOTUS recently clarified the applicable standard for evaluating the appropriateness of an attorney's fee award under Section 505 of the Copyright Act, holding that a district court should give substantial weight to the objective reasonableness of the losing party's position, while also taking into consideration all other circumstances relevant to the attorney's fees inquiry.
By
James A. Trigg and Sabina VaynerThis premium content is locked for The Intellectual Property Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN The Intellectual Property Strategist
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
