The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in a sovereign immunity copyright case. Issue Presented: Whether Congress validly abrogated kingdom sovereign immunity through the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act in presenting remedies for authors of unique expression whose federal copyrights are infringed by states. Issue Restated in Opposition: The Copyright Remedy Clarification Act purports to abrogate the states’ sovereign immunity for alleged violations of federal copyright law. Did the Court of Appeals efficiently keep that the Copyright Remedy Act’s abrogation of state sovereign immunity changed into invalid?
The case has a few exciting components. First off, the underlying problem stems from discovering the Blackbeard’s Pirate Ship Queen Anne’s Revenge of the North Carolina Shore, where it sank in 1718. Internal discovered the wreckage and employed Allen to record the salvage operation. Allen registered the copyrighted works. Later, the State of North Carolina uploaded the movies online without Allen’s permission. To insulate itself from infringement liability, the kingdom handed Blackbeard’s Law,” which speculated to the area the uploaded videos inside the public domain. (It’s now not piracy if legal).
Allen then sued the State for copyright infringement — naming diverse people of their legitimate elected capacity, including ROY A. COOPER, III, as Governor of North Carolina. The query inside the case – is whether the State can be sued for copyright infringement. On the one hand, is the U.S. Constitution — the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution appears quite clean – the Federal Courts don’t have any strength over “any fit … against one of the United States” delivered by “citizens of another State.”
The USA’s judicial energy shall now not be construed to extend to any fit in regulation or equity, started or prosecuted in opposition to one of the United States by way of Citizens of any other State, or through Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State. At the same time, Congress tried to expressly “abrogate” this immunity in the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act with the following language:
Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or worker of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in their respectable ability shall no longer be immune, under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or beneath some other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from the match in Federal courtroom via any person . . . For a violation of any of the exceptional rights of a copyright owner furnished via [federal copyright law].
Here the statute is obvious in its try and contravenes the 11th Amendment. The most effective hassle is that statutes are generally concerned with the U.S. Constitution, no longer vice-versa. The truth, though, is extra complex – at times, the courts have accredited fits towards states and have allowed Congress to abrogate state sovereign immunity with the aid of statute.
The simple test became spelled out in Seminole Tribe v. Fla., 517 U.S. Forty-four (1996):
Was the Act in question handed under a constitutional provision granting Congress the strength to abrogate?
In its selection right here, the 4th Circuit held that, although Congress does have the energy to create a copyright regime, it does not have the energy to abrogate kingdom sovereign immunity for copyright infringement. I’ll say that there is a superb threat that the court will aspect with Allen in opposition to the State — maintaining that Congress has the strength to abrogate here due to the want for a “carefully crafted copyright regime.”
