Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Federal Appeals Courts Weight in On Accruals for Copyright Infringement vs. Ownership Claims

By Stan Soocher
June 01, 2020

The U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §507(b), states that a civil copyright action must be filed within three years of its accrual. How this applies to copyright infringement and to copyright ownership claims, including in the same case, isn't always clear. But two recent federal appeals courts decisions, one from the Eleventh Circuit and one from the Second Circuit, have provided guidance on the differences in accrual for each of these copyright claims. Webster v. Dean's Guitars, 19-10013 (11th Cir. 2020), presented a case of first impression to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. In the 1980s, Buddy Webster (p/k/a Buddy Blaze) presented a Dean guitar he had rigged with a lightning storm visual to Darrell Abbott, who became a legendary guitarist for heavy metal group Pantera. In 2004, Abbott, who dubbed the guitar "The Dean from Hell" (DFH) agreed to endorse Dean guitars. When Abbott died later that year, Dean began reissuing copies of Abbott's guitar featuring the lightning graphic — without Webster's permission. Webster knew in December 2004 of the guitar reissue as well as Dean's sale of subsequent editions of the guitar, but didn't file suit until 2017 — not long after Webster federally registered the copyright in the lightning graphic. His complaint alleging copyright infringement, among other things, was litigated in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, where the district court dismissed the action as a time-barred copyright ownership claim.

On appeal, Webster argued that copyright ownership and infringement claims don't have separate accrual dates, and that under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc., 572 U.S. 663 (2014), his claim of infringement accrued every time Dean duplicated the lightning graphic. In Petrella, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a laches defense  — which argues for dismissal of a delayed lawsuit that unreasonable prejudices the defendant – didn't bar a claim for infringing activity within the three-year limitations period in §507(b).

Affirming the Florida district court in Webster, the Eleventh Circuit explained: "In Petrella, the Supreme Court stated that a copyright infringement claim 'ordinarily accrues when a plaintiff has a complete and present cause of action,' that is, 'when an infringing act occurs.' … But Petrella concerned a non-ownership copyright infringement claim." The appeals court added "that, unlike an ordinary copyright infringement claim, which accrues for each infringing act, a claim concerning mainly ownership accrues only once."

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.