Canadian Standards Association v. P.S. Knight Co., Ltd.
1:20-cv-01160
| W.D. Tex. | Aug 18, 2025Background
- Canadian Standards Association (CSA) sued P.S. Knight Co. and related defendants for copyright infringement, alleging unlawful use of the Canadian Electrical Code.
- The dispute centered on whether codes incorporated into foreign law (here, Canadian law) retain U.S. copyright protection.
- CSA succeeded at the district court level, but the Fifth Circuit reversed, holding under Veeck that codes incorporated into law enter the public domain.
- Defendants sought $252,283.50 in attorneys’ fees and $1,727.15 in costs, arguing CSA’s litigation was frivolous and in bad faith.
- The magistrate judge recommended awarding only $1,707.35 in costs, concluding CSA’s claims were brought in good faith and presented a close legal question.
- The district court fully adopted the magistrate’s recommendation after both sides briefed objections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attorneys’ fees for copyright defense | CSA acted reasonably and in good faith; issue unsettled in U.S. law for foreign-incorporated codes | Claims were frivolous and foreclosed by precedent; CSA litigated in bad faith | Denied attorneys’ fees—claims were reasonable and not in bad faith |
| Reasonableness of claims under Veeck | Distinction between U.S. and foreign law justified the suit; initial district court win showed plausibility | Veeck controls—CSA should have known suit was meritless | Claims were not objectively unreasonable; legal ambiguity justified litigation |
| Bad faith in litigation tactics | Litigation conducted normally; no improper purpose or harassment | CSA’s tactics and litigation history show intent to burden defendants | No bad faith found; record lacked evidence of wrongful intent |
| Policy goals of the Copyright Act (compensation/deterrence) | Fee shift would unfairly punish legitimate legal questions and chill good-faith litigation | Awarding fees would deter meritless claims, as here, and compensate prevailing defense | No fee award; deterrence/compensation goals not furthered in this context |
Key Cases Cited
- Veeck v. S. Bldg. Code Congress Int’l, Inc., 293 F.3d 791 (5th Cir. 2002) (holding codes incorporated into law are not copyrightable and enter the public domain)
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994) (establishing standard for discretionary fee-shifting in copyright cases, balancing objectives of compensation and deterrence)
- Prof’l Real Estate Inv’rs, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc., 508 U.S. 49 (1993) (defining objectively reasonable standard for litigation under copyright law)