Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Co.
747 F.3d 673
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Alaska Stock, a stock photo agency, owned copyrights via assignments from individual photographers and registered large collections (CD catalogs/databases) with the Copyright Office using forms that named only a few photographers and described the deposit as a CD/catalog of photos.
- Alaska Stock licensed images to Houghton Mifflin; Houghton Mifflin and its printer exceeded licensed usage, prompting Alaska Stock to sue for infringement and damages.
- The Copyright Office had for decades permitted stock agencies to register a collective work and to extend registration to component works owned by the registrant without listing every contributor or each component title; Alaska Stock followed that practice and received registration certificates.
- The district court dismissed Alaska Stock’s complaint, holding the registrations defective because they did not list each photographer and each photograph title, so they covered only the catalogs, not the individual images.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that registration of a collective work by the owner of the constituent copyrights registers the component works even when individual authors/titles are not listed, and gave deference to the Copyright Office’s longstanding practice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether registering a collective work registers the component works when registrant owns their copyrights | Registration of the catalogs sufficed to register individual images; Copyright Office practice supports this | Section 409 requires listing each author and each title; failure limits registration to the collective work only | Held: Registration of a collective work extends to component works when the claimant owns their copyrights and followed Copyright Office practice |
| Whether §409’s requirements (author names/titles) unambiguously demand listing every contributor and component title | Statute permits identification of the collective work; titles/authors of components not required | Statute’s text ("author or authors" and "title of the work") unambiguously requires all contributors/titles | Held: "Work" in §409 refers to the collective work; statutory text is reasonably read to allow the Office’s practice |
| Whether deference should be given to the Copyright Office’s practice | Office’s long, consistent practice and forms are persuasive and rely-worthy; industry reliance favors deference | Administrative practice cannot override unambiguous statutory text | Held: Court gives substantial weight to the Office’s longstanding, persuasive interpretation (Skidmore), possibly entitled to Chevron-level deference but decided on persuasive-authority grounds |
| Whether prior circuit precedent forbids collective registrations from covering component works | Cited decisions (Fourth, Fifth, Third) support collective registration effect when registrant owns components | Cited Second Circuit decision interpreted registration more narrowly when registrant did not own component copyrights | Held: Decisions from other circuits (Metro. Reg’l, Szabo, Kay Berry) support the rule; Morris is consistent once clarified — collective registration covers components when claimant owns them |
Key Cases Cited
- Metro. Reg’l Info. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Home Realty Network, Inc., 722 F.3d 591 (4th Cir. 2013) (collective-work registration can cover component images when registrant owns their copyrights)
- Szabo v. Errisson, 68 F.3d 940 (5th Cir. 1995) (single registration for a collection registers individual songs in the collection)
- Morris v. Bus. Concepts, Inc., 259 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2001) (collective registration did not cover a component when claimant did not own that component; clarified on rehearing)
- Kay Berry, Inc. v. Taylor Gifts, Inc., 421 F.3d 199 (3d Cir. 2005) (registration of a collective work is sufficient to support infringement claims on underlying parts)
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. United States, 437 U.S. 443 (1978) (longstanding administrative construction should not be disturbed absent cogent reasons)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (framework for judicial deference to reasonable administrative interpretations)