Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com

Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com
Full case name Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com
Docket nos. 17-571
Prior history On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Questions presented
Whether a copyright owner may commence an infringement suit after delivering the proper deposit, application, and fee to the Copyright Office, but before the Register of Copyrights has acted on the application for registration.

Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com is a forthcoming Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court will decide if a copyright infringement suit must wait until the copyright is successfully registered by the United States Copyright Office.[1] The Copyright Act of 1976 does require "registration" before bringing an infringement suits,[2] but exactly when that registration is attained is unclear. Some circuit courts, such as the Eleventh and Tenth, believe it is considered registered upon the application for registration, with the associated deposit and fee. This is known as the "application approach." Others, including the Ninth and Fifth Circuits, believe it is only attained upon the copyright's approval by the Copyright Office, which is the "registration approach."[1][3]

Fourth Estate wrote articles and licensed them for publication by other entities. One of their clients, Wall-Street.com, cancelled their licensing arrangement, and the license required Wall-Street.com to remove the content from their site, which they refused to do. Fourth Estate sued for copyright infringement. However, although they had filed for registration with the Copyright Office, the Office had not yet approved their request. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that the infringement suit couldn't be brought because of that lack of approval.[4] The turnaround time for a registration with the Copyright Office can be months at a time, although they offer an $800 expedited review process for cases with "compelling needs" like upcoming lawsuits.[3] Fourth Estate contends that the Eleventh Circuit misread the statute, and believes that the requirement of "registration" refers to the action of the copyright holder, and not an action of the Copyright Office. Further, they contend normatively that a copyright holder's rights should not depend upon affirmative government action.[1]

The case was granted certiorari by the Supreme Court and will likely be heard sometime in Fall 2018. Fourth Estate will be represented at oral arguments by Aaron M. Panner.[5] Peter K. Stris[6] will represent Wall-Street and Jerrold Burden.

A decision in Fourth Estate's favor would essentially remove the Copyright Office's role in the process of moving copyright infringement cases to litigation.[1]

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Pottinger, Nicole E. (2018-07-20). "A (Brief) Overview of Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation v. Wall-Street.com, LLC". Kentucky Law Journal. Retrieved 2018-07-27.
  2. ↑ 17 U.S.C. § 412
  3. 1 2 Wharton, Jake (2018-06-28). "Supreme Court to Resolve Copyright Registration Circuit Split". IPWatchdog.com. Retrieved 2018-07-27.
  4. ↑ McCall, Angélique (2018-07-22). "US Supreme Court Tackles Copyright Registration Circuit Split". IPWatchdog.com. Retrieved 2018-07-24.
  5. ↑ "US Supreme Court Grants Review for Certiorari in Fourth Estate v Wall-Street". Fourth Estate. June 28, 2018. Retrieved 2018-07-30.
  6. ↑ "U.S. Supreme Court Grants Review in Fourth Estate v. Wall-Street.com, Peter Stris to Argue". Stris & Maher LLP. June 28, 2018. Retrieved 2018-07-27.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.