2019 Important Copyright Case Review

This Monday we take a look back at the biggest copyright cases of the year.

Fourth Estate vs Wall-Street.com

My favorite, the Fourth Estate versus Wall-Street, finally ended a split in the circuits. It used to be that the case really depended on where your copyright case was happening as to whether or not you could bring it before you got a copyright registration. That Supreme court ruling in Fourth Estate versus Wall-Street finally ended that circuit split. The U S Supreme court said in March that copyright owners must wait for the copyright office to give them the green light to sue. That means your copyright now must be registered. So copyright registration, more important than ever, before you can file suit. Do it early, do it often. Good rule for copyright registration.

Rimini Street vs Oracle

Another big decision was Rimini Street versus Oracle. That case said that costs, and again, this was a Supreme court case, unanimous decision written by Justice Kavanaugh, followed by the entire Supreme court, said that costs in a copyright case include attorney's fees but don't include these massive expanded costs that happened in the Rimidi case. $12 million, which included things like E-discovery and expert witness costs.

Marcus Gray vs Katy Perry

Another big decision I thought was kind of fun was the Marcus Gray versus Katy Perry - Joyful Noise case, which is on appeal. A jury verdict found that Katy Perry had infringed Joyful Noise. 

Dr. Seuss Enterprises vs ComicMix

Dr Seuss enterprises versus ComicMix addressed mashups and mashups is something that's I think we're going to see more of soon because in this decision, they said it was fair use. In other words, it was allowed for the company ComicMix to create a version of a Dr Seuss book because they had transformed the comic book efficiently. 

Silver Top Associates vs Kangaroo Manufacturing

In August, the third circuit cited the Star Athletica case, a Supreme court 2017 ruling when it said that this company Rasta Imposta, which had a copyright on its banana costume, could block a rival company called Kangaroo Manufacturing from selling a look alike costume. The court said, Rasta Imposta established a reasonable likelihood that it could prove entitlement to protection for the veritable fruits of its intellectual labor.