Form 19 and oral arguments in Reed Elesevier v. Muchnick

Filed under Registration, Supreme Court

There’s a section of last month’s Supreme Court oral arguments in Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick that I’ve been meaning to point to for a while. Counsel for the Petitioners, when arguing that registration is a case processing rule and not jurisdictional, raised Form 19:

MR. SIMS: . . . This Court’s own forms for copyright infringement, which were first promulgated in the 1930s, have patterned our argument and are contrary to the amicuses’. They have always treated the registration provision of the model complaint differently from the jurisdictional provisions. Those are in separate sections, not next to each other even.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We have forms for copyright infringement actions?
MR. SIMS: You do. The Federal Rule –
(Laughter.)
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Live and learn.
MR. SIMS: And because they haven’t changed very much in 70 years, you probably haven’t spent much time with them.
JUSTICE GINSBURG: It’S Form 19.
MR. SIMS: Yes. It was originally Form 17. We have gone through the history. But I think there is really only one change and in every respect it is identical to what it was in 1938. And, again, as I say, it separates out the registration provision from the jurisdictional provision.

The federal Forms are adopted under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 84, which states that they are “sufficient under the [F.R.C.P.] and are intended to indicate the simplicity and brevity of statement which the rules contemplate.” (I like Chief Justice Roberts was unaware of Form 19.) Petitioners made the rather clever argument that registration was historically not a jurisdictional requirement through the fact that registration wasn’t included in the Form’s jurisdiction section:

COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

AND UNFAIR COMPETITION

1.         <Statement of Jurisdiction.  See Form 7.>

<a.  For diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction.> The plaintiff is [a citizen of State A] [a corporation incorporated under the laws of State A with its principal place of business in State A].  The defendant is [a citizen of State B] [a corporation incorporated under the laws of State B with its principal place of business in State B].  The amount in controversy, without interest and costs, exceeds the sum or value specified by 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

<b.  For federal-question jurisdiction.> This action arises under [the United States Constitution; specify the article or amendment and the section] [a United States treaty; specify] [a federal statute, ___U.S.C. § ___].

<c.  For a claim in the admiralty or maritime jurisdiction.> This is a case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction.  <To invoke admiralty status under Rule 9(h) use the following:  This is an admiralty or maritime claim within the meaning of Rule 9(h).>

2.         Before <Date>, the plaintiff, a United States citizen, wrote a book entitled ____________ _________________________________________________.

3.         The book is an original work that may be copyrighted under United States law.  A copy of the book is attached as Exhibit A.

4.         Between <Date> and <Date>, the plaintiff applied to the copyright office and received a certificate of registration dated <Date> and identified as <Date, Class, Number>.

5.         Since <Date>, the plaintiff has either published or licensed for publication all copies of the book in compliance with the copyright laws and has remained the sole owner of the copyright.

6.         After the copyright was issued, the defendant infringed the copyright by publishing and selling a book entitled <______________>, which was copied largely from the plaintiff’s book.  A copy of the defendant’s book is attached as Exhibit B.

7.         The plaintiff has notified the defendant in writing of the infringement.

8.         The defendant continues to infringe the copyright by continuing to publish and sell the infringing book in violation of the copyright, and further has engaged in unfair trade practices and unfair competition in connection with its publication and sale of the infringing book, thus causing irreparable damage.

Therefore, the plaintiff demands that:

(a)        until this case is decided the defendant and the defendant’s agents be enjoined from disposing of any copies of the defendant’s book by sale or otherwise;

(b)        the defendant account for and pay as damages to the plaintiff all profits and advantages gained from unfair trade practices and unfair competition in selling the defendant’s book, and all profits and advantages gained from infringing the plaintiff’s copyright (but no less than the statutory minimum);

(c)        the defendant deliver for impoundment all copies of the book in the defendant’s possession or control and deliver for destruction all infringing copies and all plates, molds, and other materials for making infringing copies;

(d)       the defendant pay the plaintiff interest, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees; and

(e)        the plaintiff be awarded any other just relief.

Date:  <Date> <Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party>

________________________________________

<Printed name>

<Address>

<E-mail address>

<Telephone number>

publishing attorneys

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.