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][2]
| Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided May 9, 2024 | |
| Full case name | Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy |
| Citations | 601 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Holding | |
| Assuming the discovery rule applies to copyright infringement, the three-year statute of limitations for an infringement suit does not prevent recovery. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kagan |
| Dissent | Gorsuch |
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."[1]
References
editExternal links
edit- Text of Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, 601 U.S. ___ (2024) is available from: Cornell Findlaw Justia
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |