Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Background

A Thai student who resold cheaper, foreign-made English textbooks in the United States was sued by an academic publisher for copyright infringement. The student relied on the "first-sale" rule that typically lets an owner resell a lawfully purchased work. After this Court later held that the first-sale rule covers foreign-made books, the student asked the trial court for over $2 million in attorney’s fees under the Copyright Act. The trial court denied the request, giving substantial weight to the publisher’s objectively reasonable but unsuccessful legal position; a federal appeals court affirmed. The Supreme Court took the case to resolve how lower courts should evaluate fee requests.

Reasoning

The Court explained that the Copyright Act gives judges broad discretion to award fees but must be guided by the law’s basic goals: promoting public access to creative works and balancing rewards for creators with the ability of others to build on those works. The Court said district judges should give substantial weight to whether the losing party’s position was objectively reasonable, but that this factor is not dispositive. Judges must consider all relevant circumstances, and they may still award or deny fees even if the loser advanced a reasonable claim or defense. The Court found the alternative proposal—to favor fee awards that encourage resolution of close legal questions—less reliable and harder for judges to apply.

Real world impact

The decision sends the fee question back to the trial court to re-evaluate the award under this guidance. Going forward, judges should prioritize the reasonableness of the losing side’s arguments when deciding fee awards, while retaining flexibility to account for misconduct, deterrence, or other circumstances.