Copyright registration mistakes
Unicolors v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L. P.
In brief
The Supreme Court said a lack of knowledge about either the facts or the law may excuse an inaccurate copyright registration, then wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back (vacated and remanded).
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 6-3 · February 24, 2022 · Opinion by Justice Breyer
- What it’s about
- Design company Unicolors sued clothing retailer H&M Hennes & Mauritz over a fabric design and a disputed copyright registration.
- Who it affects
- The ruling means a registration mistake does not automatically defeat copyright protection when the owner lacked knowledge of the relevant facts or the law.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court ruled that an inaccurate registration may still receive the Copyright Act’s protection when the owner lacked knowledge of either the relevant facts or the law, wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s judgment, and sent the case back to the lower court (vacated and remanded).
The case addressed how copyright law treats mistakes in registration applications and whether courts must involve the Copyright Office.
Question presented
Did the Ninth Circuit err in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. § 411 requires referral to the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in the subject copyright registration?
What the Court decided
Holding
Section 411(b) does not distinguish between a mistake of law and a mistake of fact; lack of either factual or legal knowledge can excuse an inaccuracy in a copyright registration under §411(b)(1)(A)’s safe harbor. 959 F. 3d 1194, vacated and remanded.
- Result
- Vacated
The vote
From the opinions
“Because I would not reward Unicolors for its legerdemain, and because no other court had, before today, ever addressed whether §411(b)(1)(A) requires “actual knowledge,” I would dismiss the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted.”
What's next
The Ninth Circuit will reconsider the dispute under the Supreme Court’s rule about factual and legal knowledge. The case remains open, including the final result of Unicolors’ copyright lawsuit against H&M.
Why it matters
The Ninth Circuit must reconsider this case, so the Supreme Court did not finally resolve the dispute between Unicolors and H&M.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 6 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: status, opinion_date
Opinion added: opinion
Brief added: Petition
Brief added: Questions Presented
More questions
- What was Unicolors v. H&M about?
- Unicolors sued H&M over a fabric design and a disputed copyright registration.
- What rule did the Supreme Court announce?
- A lack of knowledge about either the relevant facts or the law can excuse an inaccurate registration under Section 411(b).
- What did the Court do to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling?
- It wiped out the ruling and sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit (vacated and remanded).
- What remains unresolved in Unicolors v. H&M?
- The final outcome of the copyright dispute remains open; the Supreme Court did not decide which side wins.
- What happens next for Unicolors and H&M?
- The Ninth Circuit will reconsider the case under the Supreme Court’s rule about factual and legal knowledge.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.