17 U.S.C. § 502

Remedies for infringement: Injunctions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 17 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any court having jurisdiction of a civil action arising under this title may, subject to the provisions of section 1498 of title 28, grant temporary and final injunctions on such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright.(b) Any such injunction may be served anywhere in the United States on the person enjoined; it shall be operative throughout the United States and shall be enforceable, by proceedings in contempt or otherwise, by any United States court having jurisdiction of that person. The clerk of the court granting the injunction shall, when requested by any other court in which enforcement of the injunction is sought, transmit promptly to the other court a certified copy of all the papers in the case on file in such clerk’s office.(Pub. L. 94–553, title I, § 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2584.)Historical and Revision Noteshouse report no. 94–1476

Section 502(a) [subsec. (a) of this section] reasserts the discretionary power of courts to grant injunctions and restraining orders, whether “preliminary,” “temporary,” “interlocutory,” “permanent,” or “final,” to prevent or stop infringements of copyright. This power is made subject to the provisions of section 1498 of title 28 dealing with infringement actions against the United States. The latter reference in section 502(a) makes it clear that the bill would not permit the granting of an injunction against an infringement for which the Federal Government is liable under section 1498.

Under subsection (b), which is the counterpart of provisions in sections 112 and 113 of the present statute [sections 112 and 113 of former title 17], a copyright owner who has obtained an injunction in one State will be able to enforce it against a defendant located anywhere else in the United States.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 692 cases (214 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Disney Enter., Inc. v. Farmer, 427 F. Supp. 2d 807 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Disney Enter., Inc. v. Farmer, 427 F. Supp. 2d 807 (E.D. Tenn. 2006). · cites it 8× “§ 505 ; and (3) Plaintiffs be awarded permanent injunctive relief under 17 U.S.C. §§ 502 and 503 (Court File No. *810 13).”

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Stewart, 461 F. Supp. 2d 837 (S.D. Ill. 2006). · cites it 8× “§ 505 ; and (3) Plaintiffs are awarded permanent injunctive relief under 17 U.S.C. §§ 502 and 503. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs filed this action against Defendant on March 17, 2006, seeking damages and injunctive relief for willful copyright infringement under the copyright laws of…”

TD Bank NA v. Vernon Hill, II, 928 F.3d 259 (3rd Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “The Copyright Act does not direct courts to depart from traditional principles of equity in adjudicating requests for injunctive relief, see 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a), and eBay’s reliance on the Court’s copyright decisions makes its applicability even clearer here than in Ferring.”

Salinger v. Colting, 607 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “” 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a). And, as the District Court stated, this Court has long issued preliminary injunctions in copyright cases upon a finding of (a) irreparable harm and (b) either (1) likelihood of success on the merits or (2) sufficiently serious questions going to the merits…”

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 654 F.3d 210 (2d Cir. 2011). · cites it 6× “[8] Wiley sought a preliminary and permanent injunction under 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a), [9] and statutory damages under 17 U.”

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 518 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (C.D. Cal. 2007). · cites it 4× “Third, StreamCast should be forced to distribute do-not-infringe messages as search results, so that users who continue to search for copyrighted material are given a warning not to infringe. b. Advertising Plaintiffs ask that StreamCast be denied the right to sell advertising…”

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon. Com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “” 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a). “Preliminary injunctive relief is available to a party who demonstrates either: (1) a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable harm; or (2) that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships tips in its…”

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994). · cites it 2× “See 17 U. S. C. § 502 (a) (court " may . . . grant .”

Disney Enter., Inc. v. Vidangel, Inc., 869 F.3d 848 (9th Cir. 2017). “See 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a) (authorizing a court to enter a temporary injunction “on such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of copyright”); Perfect 10, 508 F.”

Barcroft Media, Ltd. v. Coed Media Grp., LLC, 297 F. Supp. 3d 339 (S.D. Ill. 2017). · cites it 2× “See 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a) (providing that a court may "grant .”

Capitol Records v. Rita Carmichael, 508 F. Supp. 2d 1079 (S.D. Ala. 2007). · cites it 3× “§ 505 ; and (3) injunc-tive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 502 *1082 and 503, prohibiting Carmichael from further infringing conduct and requiring her to destroy all copies of sound recordings made in violation of plaintiffs’ exclusive rights.”

Perfect 10, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 653 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “1837 (quoting 17 U.S.C. § 502 (a)). Again, this permissive language does not evince a congressional intent to depart from traditional equitable principles, and the statutory language giving a copyright holder (like a patent holder) “the right to exclude others from using his…”

Show all 692 citing cases →

— 17 U.S.C. § 502(a) — 5 cases

Marvin Music Co. v. BHC Ltd. P'ship, 830 F. Supp. 651 (D. Mass. 1993).

Gener-Villar v. Adcom Grp., Inc., 560 F. Supp. 2d 112 (D.P.R. 2008).

Bgsd, Inc. v. Spaze Up LLC (E.D. Pa. 2024).

Herbilicious Music v. Screenbuzz Ent. LLC (W.D. Wash. 2025).

Nifty Home Prods., Inc. v. Ladynana US, ET AL. (W.D. Pa. 2026).

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.