CoStar Group, Inc. v. Commercial Real Estate Exchange Inc.
2:20-cv-08819
C.D. Cal.Jun 25, 2025Background
- CoStar, a commercial real estate data company, sued CREXi, a competing real estate listing platform, for copyright infringement and violations of the DMCA, alleging over 48,000 of its images were used unlawfully.
- The case involves two categories of images: "User-Uploaded" (posted by CREXi’s users) and "User-Directed" (CREXi or its contractors uploaded on users’ behalf, sometimes copying from CoStar’s platform).
- Both parties filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment on liability as to copyright infringement, DMCA violations, safe harbor defenses, and time-barred claims.
- The events span several years; CoStar registered its photos and claims significant resources spent in curating its library and watermarking photos. CREXi denies infringing and claims safe harbor under DMCA.
- Several affirmative defenses are at issue, including safe harbor, statute of limitations, unclean hands, and others, with both sides disputing evidentiary admissibility on select declarations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Copyright Ownership | CoStar owns & registers the photos in question | CoStar has not proven ownership/employment for each | CoStar shown to own images at issue |
| Volitional Conduct for Infringement | CREXi actively involved in infringement, esp. User-Directed | For User-Uploaded, actions were user‐instigated; not volitional | Volition found for User-Directed images; disputed for User-Uploaded |
| DMCA Watermark/CMI | CoStar’s watermark/logo is CMI on infringed images | The logo isn’t always CMI; no clear knowledge or intent | Disputes of fact preclude summary judgment; logo pre-2017 not CMI |
| Safe Harbor Defense (DMCA § 512) | CREXi does not qualify—did not store at user’s direction or notify | Has repeat infringer policy; images stored at user direction | Not available for User-Directed images; factual disputes for others |
| Statute of Limitations | Claims timely; discovery rule applies | Claims on older infringements are time-barred | Infringements before Dec. 19, 2019 are time-barred |
| Unclean Hands | No misconduct related to merits | Points to CoStar’s scraping and inclusion of some unowned images | Scraping irrelevant; fact disputes on image ownership, misuse |
Key Cases Cited
- Perfect 10, Inc. v. Giganews, Inc., 847 F.3d 657 (9th Cir. 2017) (defines direct copyright liability and volitional conduct)
- VHT, Inc. v. Zillow Grp., Inc., 918 F.3d 723 (9th Cir. 2019) (refines volitional conduct for online platforms)
- CoStar Grp., Inc. v. LoopNet, Inc., 373 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2004) (volitional conduct and ISP liability)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for material fact in summary judgment)
- UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Cap. Partners LLC, 718 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2013) (DMCA safe harbor, notice requirements)
- Oracle Am., Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Enter. Co., 971 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2020) (accrual of copyright claims under discovery rule)
- Mavrix Photographs, LLC v. Livejournal, Inc., 873 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2017) (agency, moderator actions affecting DMCA defenses)
- Dream Games of Arizona, Inc. v. PC Onsite, 561 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 2009) (unclean hands in copyright)