Crew Knitwear, Inc. sought a finding that U.S. Textile Printing’s copyrights in designs were invalid.  Crew alleged that U.S. Textile engaged in a broad pattern of fraud in which they routinely registered design patterns created by others.  Crew argued that U.S. Textile fraudulently secured the copyright registration in the designs at issue by intentionally misrepresenting to the Copyright Office that the designs were works made for hire.  Judge Wright II of the Central District of California denied the motion for summary judgment, finding that the issue of how the designs were created was better determined by a trier of fact:

A party seeking to establish such fraud, and thereby rebut the presumption of copyright validity . . . bears a heavy burden. Absent intent to defraud and prejudice, inaccuracies in copyright registration do not bar actions for infringement.” S.O.S., Inc. v. Payday, Inc., 886 F.2d 1081, 1086 (9th Cir.1989). On the record before it, the Court is of the opinion that disputed issues of material fact preclude summary judgment. Equally competing evidence has been presented, for example, as to whether the designs at issue were works made for hire, and therefore as to whether Defendants intended to defraud the Copyright Office by registering the subject designs as such.

Documents: