Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
2017 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc.?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court decided under what circumstances aesthetic elements of "useful articles" can be restricted by copyright law. The Court created a two-prong "separability" test, granting copyrightability based on separate identification and independent existence; the aesthetic elements must be identifiable as art if mentally separated from the article's practical use, and must qualify as copyrightable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works if expressed in any medium.
Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc. | |
---|---|
Argued October 31, 2016 Decided March 22, 2017 | |
Full case name | Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., et al. |
Docket no. | 15-866 |
Citations | 580 U.S. ___ (more) 137 S. Ct. 1002; 197 L. Ed. 2d 354; 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2026 |
Argument | Oral argument |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior |
|
Subsequent | Case settled over Star Athletica's objection (2017) |
Holding | |
Aesthetic design elements on useful articles, like clothing, can be copyrightable if they can be separately identified as art and exist independently of the useful article. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan |
Concurrence | Ginsburg |
Dissent | Breyer, joined by Kennedy |
Laws applied | |
Copyright Act of 1976 (17 U.S.C. § 101) |
The case was a dispute between two clothing manufacturers, Star Athletica and Varsity Brands. Star Athletica began creating cheerleading uniforms with stripes, zigzags, and chevron insignia similar to those made by a Varsity subsidiary, but at a lower price. Varsity sued Star Athletica for copyright infringement, and Star Athletica said that the clothing designs were uncopyrightable because their aesthetic designs were tied closely to (and guided by) their utilitarian purpose as uniforms. The court rejected this argument with a close reading of the statute and established that the clothing designs, as aesthetic elements of a useful article of clothing, could be copyrightable. It declined to hear Star Athletica's follow-up question about whether Varsity's designs were original enough to be copyrightable, so that part of the case remained unaddressed and Varsity's copyright registrations stood.
The court's conclusion that aesthetic elements of useful articles (and, thereby, clothing-design elements) could be copyrighted intrigued fashion designers and intellectual property scholars. Some were pleased with the decision because they saw extending copyright to clothes as parity with other creative industries which had had copyrights for much longer. Others denounced the court's opinion because of ambiguities in how to enforce the new rules and because of its potential to end fashion trends in generic clothing.