F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts, Inc | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued November 17, 1952 Decided December 22, 1952 | |
Full case name | F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts, Inc |
Citations | 344 U.S. 228 (more) |
Case history | |
Prior | 93 F. Supp. 739 (D. Mass. 1950); affirmed, 193 F.2d 162 (1st Cir. 1951); cert. granted, 343 U.S. 963 (1952). |
Holding | |
Trial judges enjoy wide latitude with imposing possible remedies to discourage copyright violations. They may penalize infringers with repaying profits, compensation for damages or statutory damages as appropriate to the situation. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Jackson, joined by Vinson, Reed, Douglas, Burton, Clark, Minton |
Dissent | Black, joined by Frankfurter |
Laws applied | |
Copyright Act of 1909 |
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts, Inc. nicknamed The Cocker Spaniel Case, 344 U.S. 228 (1952), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding copyright infringement. The Copyright Act of 1909 allows recovery of either the profits of the infringing company or of the damages suffered by the copyright holder as the legal remedies. When the actual damages cannot be determined, statutory damages can be levied instead. At issue, is whether the trial judge can impose statutory damages when the actual profits of the infringer are known.