(credit: sparkle-motion)
On Thursday, the Supreme Court provided nuanced guidance to lower courts in determining whether the prevailing party in a copyright lawsuit should be awarded attorney fees. The decision by the unanimous eight-member court revives a $2 million fee dispute in one of the court's most important copyright cases in the digital era.
The issue is significant because attorneys fees play a huge role in US litigation, and they are among the top considerations of whether a lawsuit would be brought or even defended.
The case the justices decided Thursday (PDF) concerns the fallout from Kirtsaeng v. Wiley, the court's 2013 decision involving the rights of those who buy copyrighted works. In that closely watched case, the justices had ruled that the first-sale doctrine allowed a US university student to buy textbooks overseas and resell them on eBay while undercutting textbook publisher John Wiley & Sons. The publisher sued on copyright infringement allegations and lost in a case in which the justices certified the reselling rights of those who buy copyrighted works. At the same time, the ruling put companies on notice that they don't have unlimited control of their products once they hit the stream of commerce.
Read 6 remaining paragraphs | Comments
No comments:
Post a Comment