The Copyright Act permits the prevailing party of a copyright lawsuit to be awarded reasonable attorney fees, but is silent as to when such an award is appropriate. More than 20 years ago, the Supreme Court set forth “several non-exclusive factors” to consider when awarding attorney fees. Yesterday, in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., the Supreme Court expanded its guidance holding that lower courts should give “substantial” weight to the “objective (un)reasonableness” of the losing party’s litigating position. The justices reasoned that this approach promotes the underlying purpose of the Copyright Act.

The Copyright Act permits the prevailing party of a copyright lawsuit to be awarded reasonable attorney fees, but is silent as to when such an award is appropriate. More than 20 years ago, the Supreme Court set forth “several non-exclusive factors” to consider when awarding attorney fees. Yesterday, in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., the Supreme Court expanded its guidance holding that lower courts should give “substantial” weight to the “objective (un)reasonableness” of the losing party’s litigating position. The justices reasoned that this approach promotes the underlying purpose of the Copyright Act.

You can read the full case here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-375_4f57.pdf