Wilson v. Dynatone Publ'g Co., 908 F.3d 843

Plaintiffs sued over ownership of renewal-term copyrights in musical compositions and sound recordings; district court dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) as time-barred; this Court vacated and remanded.
Defendants petitioned for rehearing, arguing that an adverse registration in the Copyright Office starts the accrual period under 17 U.S.C. § 205(c), so the suit was untimely.
§ 205(c) provides that recordation gives constructive notice of facts in the recorded document if the document identifies the work and registration exists for the work.
Defendants’ proposed rule would require authors to monitor the Copyright Office continually or risk losing claims if a spurious registration occurred more than three years before suit.
The panel considered persuasive precedent from several circuits rejecting that mere registration alone triggers accrual and statute-of-limitations running.
The court emphasized that the discovery rule for accrual is a common-law doctrine and § 205(c) is best read in the context of transfers and priorities rather than as an automatic accrual trigger.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an adverse Copyright Office registration alone starts accrual for an ownership claim (triggering the 3-year limitations period)	Registration alone does not start accrual; owners are not required to monitor the registry and accrual follows common-law discovery principles	An adverse registration gives constructive notice under § 205(c), so accrual (and the limitations period) begins at registration	Registration, without more, does not trigger accrual; the court rejects defendants’ reading of § 205(c) and adopts the view that discovery-rule principles govern accrual

Gaiman v. McFarlane, 360 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2004) (registration does not purposefully start statutes of limitations; authors are not expected to monitor the Copyright Office)
Brownstein v. Lindsay, 742 F.3d 55 (3d Cir. 2014) (registration alone does not repudiate co-authorship; rejecting adverse-registration-accrual rule)
Roger Miller Music, Inc. v. Sony/ATV Publ’g, LLC, 477 F.3d 383 (6th Cir. 2007) (rejected registration-as-accrual theory)
Saenger Org. v. Nationwide Licensing Assoc., 119 F.3d 55 (1st Cir. 1997) (held defendant time-barred where defendant had actual notice and relied on constructive notice, but decision may rest on actual notice)
In re World Auxiliary Power Co., 303 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2002) (treats § 205(c) constructive notice in context of priority for security interests)
Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Hirsch, 104 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 1997) (discusses § 205(c) constructive notice for transfers/priority)