Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ninth Circuit Says Copyright Plaintiffs Can Reach Back More Than Three Years In Seeking Infringement Damages
Under Section 507(b) of the U.S. Copyright Act, an infringement claim isn't timely filed "unless it is commenced within three years after the claim accrued." In its recent decision in Starz Entertainment LLC v. MGM Domestic Television Distribution LLC, 21-55379 (9th Cir. 2022), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit noted: "Generally, the claim 'accrues' when the infringement or violation of one of the copyright holder's exclusive rights occurs, known as the 'incident of injury rule.' In our circuit, and every other circuit to have reached the question, an exception to that infringement rule has developed. Known as the 'discovery rule,' a claim alternatively accrues when the copyright holder knows or reasonably should know that an infringement occurred."
In Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1962 (2014), a case filed by the heir of the rights to the screenplay underlying the movie Raging Bull, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in a majority opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg that a "laches" defense didn't bar a copyright infringement lawsuit filed within §507(b)'s three-year statute of limitations. (Laches can apply if a delay in filing a suit by a plaintiff, who knew or should have known of an alleged wrong, prejudices the defendant.)
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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 a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.