| Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy | |
|---|---|
 Supreme Court of the United States | |
| 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, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson |
| Dissent | Gorsuch, joined by Thomas, Alito |
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.
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."
References
- ^ Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, 601 U.S. ___ (2024)
- "Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy". Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center. 2024-05-09. Retrieved 2024-10-17.
External links
- 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 Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |