 |
| Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 2, 2003 Decided June 2, 2003 | |
| Full case name | Dastar Corporation, Petitioner v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, et al. |
| Citations | 539 U.S. 23 (more) 123 S. Ct. 2041; 156 L. Ed. 2d 18; 2003 U.S. LEXIS 4276; 71 U.S.L.W. 4415; 66 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1641; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 28,622; 194 A.L.R. Fed. 731; 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4554; 2003 Daily Journal DAR 5799; 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 330 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Judgment for plaintiffs, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22064 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 27, 2000); affirmed in part, sub nom. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. Entertainment Distributing, 34 Fed. Appx. 312 (9th Cir. 2002); cert. granted, sub nom. Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 537 U.S. 1099 (2003) |
| Subsequent | Judgment for plaintiffs, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21194 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2003); affirmed, sub nom. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. Entertainment Distributing, 429 F.3d 869 (9th Cir. 2005) |
| Holding | |
| Plagiarism of public domain works is not a crime under the Lanham Act, which requires only designation of the origin for the original, physical goods rather than the intangible ideas contained therein. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Thomas, Kennedy, Ginsburg |
| Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| Lanham Act § 43(a), | |
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003), was a copyright and trademark case of the Supreme Court of the United States involving the applicability of the Lanham Act to a work in the public domain.[1]
- ^ Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003).
This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
