A major consideration in copyright infringement cases is whether attorneys’ fees will be awarded at the end of a proceeding. It is a point of leverage that can be used by both the plaintiff and defendants as they seek to negotiate a pre-trial resolution. Ultimately, if the case goes to trial and a verdict, then whether to award attorneys’ fees under the Copyright Act can shift a massive amount of fees one way or the other.
If you find yourself embroiled in a copyright infringement dispute, whether pre-suit or in the middle of litigation, then feel free to contact us about your specific situation. We keep all communications confidential and seek to respond to your inquiry as quickly as possible.
The update comes by way of a decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in a case involving Affordable Aerial Photography, Inc., which is a plaintiff that we at Heitner Legal often litigate against. The Circuit Court judges rendered a decision under the wording of Section 505, which provides that a “court in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party” and “may award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs.”
In the specific matter, where Affordable Aerial Photography sued WC Realty Group for copyright infringement, Affordable Aerial Group decided to voluntarily dismiss its case, with prejudice. This dismissal occurred less than 2 months from the date that the casewas initiated and mere days after a motion to dismiss was filed with the court. The district court saw no reason to award prevailing party fees under the Copyright Act and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the lower court’s determination.
The Eleventh Circuit, which includes the State of Florida, indicated that it can award a defendant prevailing party fees and costs in a case where there is a dismissal with prejudice, but only if the court rejects the claims in the plaintiff’s case, which had not yet occurred prior to Affordable Aerial Photography’s voluntary effort to dismiss the action that it brought. Basically, because Affordable Aerial Photography acted quickly, and importantly before the court could provide its position on the merits of the case, it could escape the obligation of reimbursing the defendant for the monies it had spent on its counsel prior to dismissal.
The Eleventh Circuit cited to another Affordable Aerial Photography case where it was similarly determined that the facts of the case were “not the stuff of which [a defendant’s] legal victories are made.”
Finally, the Eleventh Circuit noted the major deference that the Copyright Act affords to district courts in determining whether prevailing party attorneys’ fees should be granted.
This decision should stand as solid precedent unless/until the U.S. Supreme Court decides to take up the action on certiorari.