Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle USA Inc., 586 U.S. ___ (2019), is a 2019 United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Copyright Act's award of "full costs," to a prevailing party in a copyright infringement claim is limited to taxable costs defined by the Fee Act of 1853, rejecting a broader interpretation that permitted fee awards to include litigation expenses outside the statutory schedule of costs.[1]
A federal district court's discretion to award "full costs" to a party in copyright litigation pursuant to 17 U. S. C. §505 is limited to the six categories specified in the general costs statute codified at 28 U. S. C. §§1821 and 1920.
The Court cited three prior Supreme Court cases limiting awards to those specified by Congress: Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc. (1987), West Virginia University Hospitals, Inc. v. Casey (1991), and Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. Murphy (2006).
Referencesedit
^Steve Brachmann, Rimini Street v. Oracle USA: Kavanaugh Frowns on Broad Interpretation of 'Full Costs' Under Copyright Act, IP Watchdog, March 4, 2019.
External linksedit
Text of Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle USA Inc., 586 U.S. ___ (2019) is available from:JustiaOyez (oral argument audio)Supreme Court (slip opinion)
SCOTUSblog page
Steve Brachmann, Rimini Street v. Oracle USA: Kavanaugh Frowns on Broad Interpretation of 'Full Costs' Under Copyright Act, IP Watchdog, March 4, 2019
rimini, street, oracle, 2019, 2019, united, states, supreme, court, case, which, court, held, that, copyright, award, full, costs, prevailing, party, copyright, infringement, claim, limited, taxable, costs, defined, 1853, rejecting, broader, interpretation, th. Rimini Street Inc v Oracle USA Inc 586 U S 2019 is a 2019 United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Copyright Act s award of full costs to a prevailing party in a copyright infringement claim is limited to taxable costs defined by the Fee Act of 1853 rejecting a broader interpretation that permitted fee awards to include litigation expenses outside the statutory schedule of costs 1 Rimini Street Inc v Oracle USA Inc Supreme Court of the United StatesArgued January 14 2019Decided March 4 2019Full case nameRimini Street Inc et al v Oracle USA Inc et al Docket no 17 1625Citations586 U S more 139 S Ct 873 203 L Ed 2d 180 129 U S P Q 2d 1459Case historyPriorOracle USA Inc v Rimini St Inc 209 F Supp 3d 1200 D Nev 2016 879 F 3d 948 125 U S P Q 2d 1380 9th Cir 2018 cert granted 139 S Ct 52 2018 HoldingA federal district court s discretion to award full costs to a party in copyright litigation pursuant to 17 U S C 505 is limited to the six categories specified in the general costs statute codified at 28 U S C 1821 and 1920 Court membershipChief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader GinsburgStephen Breyer Samuel AlitoSonia Sotomayor Elena KaganNeil Gorsuch Brett KavanaughCase opinionMajorityKavanaugh joined by unanimousLaws appliedCopyright Act of 1976 Fee Act of 1853The Court cited three prior Supreme Court cases limiting awards to those specified by Congress Crawford Fitting Co v J T Gibbons Inc 1987 West Virginia University Hospitals Inc v Casey 1991 and Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy 2006 References edit Steve Brachmann Rimini Street v Oracle USA Kavanaugh Frowns on Broad Interpretation of Full Costs Under Copyright Act IP Watchdog March 4 2019 External links editText of Rimini Street Inc v Oracle USA Inc 586 U S 2019 is available from Justia Oyez oral argument audio Supreme Court slip opinion SCOTUSblog page Steve Brachmann Rimini Street v Oracle USA Kavanaugh Frowns on Broad Interpretation of Full Costs Under Copyright Act IP Watchdog March 4 2019 nbsp This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Rimini Street Inc v Oracle USA Inc amp oldid 1175149127, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
