Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Michael Skidmore, as Trustee for the Randy Craig Wolfe Trust v. Led Zeppelin, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 16-56057, 16-56287 · judgment March 9, 2020


Certiorari denied · October 5, 2020
Pre-decision estimate: 6% cert probability (95% interval 4%–8%)

Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Ninth Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition).

Question presented

1 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 represent the 106 years that the courts of this nation recognized that musical works were protected as created and fixed in a tangible medium under the Copyright Act of 1909—and that the deposit requirement was a technical formality. In those 106 years not one copyright trial was limited or controlled by the deposit, which was usually an incomplete outline of the song. The Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision, holding that only paper sheet music deposits have copyright protection under the 1909 Act, will likely divest hundreds of thousands of songs of copyright protection. Thus, a question of first impression arises for this Court under the Copyright Act of 1909: Whether or not the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc correctly held that musical copyright protection under the Copyright Act of 1909 is limited to sheet music deposits—and only sheet music deposits—or whether songs under the 1909 Act are protected as created and fixed in a tangible medium?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Alfred Joseph Fluehr
Francis Alexander LLC

For respondent
Peter J. Anderson
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Dec 07 2020
    Rehearing DENIED.
  2. Nov 10 2020
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
  3. Oct 30 2020
    Petition for Rehearing filed.
  4. Oct 05 2020
    Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by The Pullman Group, LLC, et al. GRANTED.
  5. Oct 05 2020
    Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by California Society of Entertainment Lawyers GRANTED.
  6. Oct 05 2020
    Petition DENIED.
  7. Sep 10 2020
    Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by California Society of Entertainment Lawyers.(Distributed)
  8. Sep 10 2020
    Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by The Pullman Group, LLC, et al. (Distributed)
  9. Aug 19 2020
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
  10. Aug 17 2020
    Waiver of right of respondent James Patrick Page, Robert Anthony Plant, John Paul Jones, Warner Chappell Music, Inc., Atlantic Recording Corporation, Rhino Entertainment Company, Super Hype Publishing, Inc., and Warner Music Group Corp. to respond filed.
  11. Aug 06 2020
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 10, 2020)