Starz Ent., LLC v. MGM Domestic TV Distrib., LLC

Starz Ent., LLC v. MGM Domestic TV Distrib., LLC

Opinion

 [*1237]  WARDLAW, Circuit Judge:

] The Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., provides that a civil action for copyright infringement is timely so long as it is "commenced within three years after the claim accrued." 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). Generally, the claim "accrues" [**3]  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.

 [*1238]  In 2014, the Supreme Court addressed the interplay between § 507(b) and the doctrine of laches, holding that laches does not bar relief on a copyright infringement claim brought within § 507(b)'s three-year limitations period. Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. 663, 667-68, 134 S. Ct. 1962, 188 L. Ed. 2d 979 (2014). Since then, defendants accused of copyright infringement have seized upon certain language in Petrella to argue that the Court also did away with the discovery rule. Most courts, including the district court here, have rejected that argument, reasoning that Petrella addressed only the availability of laches in cases where the copyright owner is seeking damages for infringing acts that occurred during the three-year window before a claim is filed. Moreover, because Petrella noted, but did not pass upon, the discovery rule, any language in that opinion discussing relief beyond that window is dicta and [**4]  did not affect the viability of the discovery rule. Because we agree with the district court that the discovery rule of accrual of copyright claims is alive and well, we affirm.

1. The exclusivity agreements

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.