CA1: Copyright statutes of limitations and state law

Cambridge Literary v. W. Goebel Porzellanfabrik, No. 06-2339.  Just by the caption of the case, you can tell it is going to be a long intellectual-property case of the kind that everyone thinks is so sexy.  I never liked IP.  The problem is that outside law school, most intellectual property issues are not that sexy.  The cases are often resolved on procedural issues – in this case a statute of limitations (i.e. 17 U.S.C. § 507(b))– and the subject matters are often not that interesting (in this case it is reproduced figurines of some historical interest). 

The plaintiff claims that the dispute of the statute of limitations requires a resolution of the state-law statute of limitations regarding an accounting.  But, the First says that “In the case of an accounting for profits by a co-owner of a copyright where ownership is in dispute, that means the claimant must first establish it has ownership as a predicate to an award of an accounting for profits…” and in this case the ownership question (based on disputed co-authorship) is one of Federal law (usually decided in a declaratory judgment action).   The First tries very hard to say that the Copyright Act is not preempting a state law cause of action.

Substantively, the First discusses when a cause of action “accrues” and discusses the various splits on the issue.

Cyr dissents and says that the First really is raising too many preemption issues, after all, and will draw too much stuff into the Federal Courts.

Stepehen Rosenberg commetns here.