Defense Did Not Transcend Bounds of Reasonableness in Advocacy Under “Relatively Green Area of Copyright Law.”
Earlier, in litigation over copyright grants relating to the Superman character, Warner’s subsidiary DC Comics won a big ruling last October 2012 precluding the estate of Superman’s co-creator from terminating a copyright grant under a contractual agreement. DC Comics then sought to recoup $500,000 in fees under the Copyright Act’s fee-shifting provision, 17 U.S.C. § 505, but sought them against only two defendants (one being an heir’s attorney) on a third claim where DC Comics only achieved limited success.
U.S. District Judge Otis Wright, in DC Comics v. Pacific Pictures Corp., C.D. Cal. Case No. 2:10-cv-03635 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2013, Doc. 612, Order Denying DC’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees), denied the attorney’s fees request. Aside from DC Comic’s limited success, the defense advocacy was not frivolous in nature: “Defendants sought to explore the boundaries of a relatively green area of copyright law and did so without traversing the bounds of reasonableness.” Also, District Judge Wright found that fees were not appropriately awarded against one defendant who was nothing more than an heir’s attorney.