Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

James H. Fischer v. Sandra F. Forrest, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 18-2955, 18-2959 · judgment August 4, 2020


Certiorari denied · November 8, 2021
Pre-decision estimate: 4% cert probability

Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Second Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and counsel who has filed here before.

Questions presented

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act protects the integrity of copyright management information (“CMI”), a defined term. 17 U.S.C. § 1202(c). Section 1202(c) enumerates eight types of CMI. §1202(c)(1)- (8). Pertinent here, Section 1202(c) defines CMI as the “name” of the “author” of a copyrighted work and also as the “name” of the “copyright owner” of a work. §1202(c)(2), (c)(3). Here, an author and copyright owner of a work included his last name in the text of that work. The Second Circuit held that his name in the text was not CMI. Departing from the plain-text approach taken by the Third and Fifth Circuits, the Second Circuit held that being the name of the author or the copyright owner is not sufficient to be CMI. The Second Circuit further required that it be apparent from context that the name is copyright-related. Thus, the questions presented are:

  1. Whether the name of the author of a copyrighted work is CMI—or whether it must also be apparent from context that the name is copyright-related.

  2. Whether the name of the copyright owner of a copyrighted work is CMI—or whether it must also be apparent from context that the name is copyrightrelated.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Andrew Benedict Grimm
Digital Justice Foundation

For respondent
Daniel Kenneth Cahn
Law Offices of Cahn & Cahn, P.C.

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage

Proceedings

  1. Nov 08 2021
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Oct 20 2021
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/5/2021.
  3. Oct 20 2021
    Reply of petitioner James H. Fischer filed. (Distributed)
  4. Oct 01 2021
    Brief of respondents Sandra F. Forrest, et al. in opposition filed.
  5. Aug 11 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 1, 2021.
  6. Aug 06 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 1, 2021 to October 1, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
  7. Aug 02 2021
    Response Requested. (Due September 1, 2021)
  8. Jul 14 2021
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
  9. Jun 25 2021
    Brief amicus curiae of Information Dignity Alliance filed.
  10. Mar 15 2021
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 25, 2021)