How will US Supreme Court define “full costs” in copyright cases?
04 October 2018
|
Ellie Mertens, New York
In Rimini Street v Oracle, the definition of “full costs” awarded to prevailing parties by the Copyright Act is disputed. IP practitioners weigh in on whether the court will decide it includes only taxable costs or non-taxable costs as well
The Supreme Court granted cert to Rimini Street v Oracle on September 27, in a move aimed at clearing up the circuit-dividing issue of the definition of “full costs” in the Copyright Act.
There are three types of costs in...
Please
log in to read the rest of this article.
New to Managing Intellectual Property? Take advantage of free access to up to 5 articles on Managing IP and become a member today. It’s free to join and the benefits start straight away.
Already registered?
Please make sure you log in to read the rest of the article.
Log in
Join us now
Gain FREE access to up to five free articles when you register now. Join here