Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy explained

Litigants:Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy
Decidedate:May 9
Decideyear:2024
Fullname:Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy
Usvol:601
Uspage:___
Holding:Assuming the discovery rule applies to copyright infringement, the three-year statute of limitations for an infringement suit does not prevent recovery.
Majority:Kagan
Dissent:Gorsuch

Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, 601 U.S. ___ (2024), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, assuming the discovery rule applies to copyright infringement, the three-year statute of limitations for an infringement suit does not prevent recovery.[1]

In dissent, Justice Neil Gorsuch criticized the majority for the assumption at the heart of this case. In his view, the discovery rule "almost certainly" does not apply to copyright infringement. Even if a future court would agree that it does, Gorsuch said, "Nothing requires us to play along with these particular parties and expound on the details of a rule of law that they may assume but very likely does not exist."

Notes and References

  1. Web site: 2024-05-09 . Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy . 2024-10-17 . Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center . en-US.