U.S. Code » Title 17 » Chapter CHAPTER 12— COPYRIGHT PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

17 U.S.C. § 1203

Civil remedies

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 17 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Civil Actions.—Any person injured by a violation of section 1201 or 1202 may bring a civil action in an appropriate United States district court for such violation.(b)Powers of the Court.—In an action brought under subsection (a), the court—(1) may grant temporary and permanent injunctions on such terms as it deems reasonable to prevent or restrain a violation, but in no event shall impose a prior restraint on free speech or the press protected under the 1st amendment to the Constitution;(2) at any time while an action is pending, may order the impounding, on such terms as it deems reasonable, of any device or product that is in the custody or control of the alleged violator and that the court has reasonable cause to believe was involved in a violation;(3) may award damages under subsection (c);(4) in its discretion may allow the recovery of costs by or against any party other than the United States or an officer thereof;(5) in its discretion may award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party; and(6) may, as part of a final judgment or decree finding a violation, order the remedial modification or the destruction of any device or product involved in the violation that is in the custody or control of the violator or has been impounded under paragraph (2).(c)Award of Damages.—(1)In general.—Except as otherwise provided in this title, a person committing a violation of section 1201 or 1202 is liable for either—(A) the actual damages and any additional profits of the violator, as provided in paragraph (2), or(B) statutory damages, as provided in paragraph (3).(2)Actual damages.—The court shall award to the complaining party the actual damages suffered by the party as a result of the violation, and any profits of the violator that are attributable to the violation and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages, if the complaining party elects such damages at any time before final judgment is entered.(3)Statutory damages.—(A) At any time before final judgment is entered, a complaining party may elect to recover an award of statutory damages for each violation of section 1201 in the sum of not less than $200 or more than $2,500 per act of circumvention, device, product, component, offer, or performance of service, as the court considers just.(B) At any time before final judgment is entered, a complaining party may elect to recover an award of statutory damages for each violation of section 1202 in the sum of not less than $2,500 or more than $25,000.(4)Repeated violations.—In any case in which the injured party sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that a person has violated section 1201 or 1202 within 3 years after a final judgment was entered against the person for another such violation, the court may increase the award of damages up to triple the amount that would otherwise be awarded, as the court considers just.(5)Innocent violations.—(A)In general.—The court in its discretion may reduce or remit the total award of damages in any case in which the violator sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that the violator was not aware and had no reason to believe that its acts constituted a violation.(B)Nonprofit library, archives, educational institutions, or public broadcasting entities.—(i)Definition.—In this subparagraph, the term “public broadcasting entity” has the meaning given such term under section 118(f).(ii)In general.—In the case of a nonprofit library, archives, educational institution, or public broadcasting entity, the court shall remit damages in any case in which the library, archives, educational institution, or public broadcasting entity sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that the library, archives, educational institution, or public broadcasting entity was not aware and had no reason to believe that its acts constituted a violation.(Added Pub. L. 105–304, title I, § 103(a), Oct. 28, 1998, 112 Stat. 2874; amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title V, § 5004(a)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–593; Pub. L. 111–295, § 6(f)(3), Dec. 9, 2010, 124 Stat. 3181.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2010—Subsec. (c)(5)(B)(i). Pub. L. 111–295 substituted “118(f)” for “118(g)”.

1999—Subsec. (c)(5)(B). Pub. L. 106–113 amended heading and text of subpar. (B) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “In the case of a nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution, the court shall remit damages in any case in which the library, archives, or educational institution sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that the library, archives, or educational institution was not aware and had no reason to believe that its acts constituted a violation.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 150 cases (72 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Craigslist, Inc. v. NATUREMARKET, INC., 694 F. Supp. 2d 1039 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Craigslist, Inc. v. NATUREMARKET, INC., 694 F. Supp. 2d 1039 (N.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 6× “§ 502 (a) (authorizing a court to grant injunctions “as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright”); 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (b)(1) (authorizing courts to issue permanent injune *1062 tions in actions brought under § 1201 “on such terms as [they] deem[ ]…”
Energy Intelligence Grp, Inc. v. Kayne Ande, 948 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 3× “§ 504 (c) (infringement damages “in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just”); 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(3)(B) (DMCA damages “in the sum of not less than $2,500 or more than $25,000”).”
Stockwire Rsch. Grp., Inc. v. Lebed, 577 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (S.D. Fla. 2008). · cites it 8× “4 As an initial matter, given Defendants’ liability, the Court finds that Plaintiff Stoekwire is entitled to the requested equitable relief under Count II pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (b), and enjoins Defendants from further use of the Stockumentary.”
Stephanie Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 815 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(1)(A). If Congress intended to similarly limit the recovery of § 512(f) damages to pecuniary losses, it could have chosen to do so.”
Blueport Co. v. United States, 533 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “” (emphasis added)); 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(1) (providing that “a person committing a violation of section 1201 or 1202 is liable for____” (emphasis added)).”
Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. Pak China Grp. Co., 843 F. Supp. 2d 1284 (S.D. Fla. 2012). · cites it 6× “This Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”
Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). · cites it 4× “17 U.S.C. § 1203 (a). 260 . Def. Post-Trial Mem.”
Agence France Presse v. Morel, 934 F. Supp. 2d 547 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 3× “” 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(3)(B). Morel contends that this provision allows him to recover a separate award of statutory damages for each distribution of the Photos-at-Issue.”
Sony Comput. Ent. Am., Inc. v. Divineo, Inc., 457 F. Supp. 2d 957 (N.D. Cal. 2006). · cites it 4× “17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(3)(A). Plaintiff has elected to pursue statutory damages in this case.”
Mango v. Buzzfeed, Inc., 356 F. Supp. 3d 368 (S.D. Ill. 2019). “17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c). Mango seeks statutory damages of $ 5,000.”
Agence France Presse v. Morel, 293 F.R.D. 682 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 2× “A; see 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(3)(B). He further disclosed that he would seek this maximum award, per type of violation, for each of the photographs at issue, which at the time—according to Defendants—was thought to be 13, although all *684 now agree that it is actually 8.”
GC2 Inc. v. Int'l Game Tech., IGT, 391 F. Supp. 3d 828 (E.D. Ill. 2019). · cites it 2× “See 17 U.S.C. § 1203 (c)(3). The Court concluded that a valuation on the low end of the statutory scale was appropriate and awarded $2,500 per violation, for a total of $1,740,000 in DMCA damages.”
Show all 150 citing cases →
17 U.S.C. § 1203(c)(5)(A): 1 case
Wareka v. JW Sanders PLLC, No. 1:23-cv-00246 (W.D. Tex. May 3, 2024).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.