The IP boutique firm Hsuanyeh Law Group has launched a lawsuit against Winston & Strawn, claiming copyright violation over a brief. The issue arose after both firms represented different parties in patent infringement actions against the same entity in the Eastern District of Texas.
In the course of these proceedings, Hsuanyeh filed a Rule 12 motion on August 23. Winston & Strawn then filed a similar motion on behalf of their client on August 24, which allegedly echoed the Hsuanyeh motion. By August 30, Hsuanyeh had secured a copyright registration for their original motion and proceeded to demand statutory damages.
The case has sparked a considerable debate due to the cases that Hsuanyeh has cited in their suit. For instance, Hsuanyeh references the White v. West case, which affirmed that briefs could be subjected to copyright. However, it was about Westlaw publishing and profiting from publicly filed legal briefs. Therefore, this logic might not be applicable to the current situation where Winston & Strawn allegedly copied a part of Hsuanyeh’s brief. In the original White v. West court decision, even though the judgment accepted that briefs could theoretically be copyrighted, it concluded that publishing them on Westlaw was protected by fair use.
Another case that Hsuanyeh referred to was Newegg, which involved attorneys in the same matter. The defendant lawyer in this case was accused of plagiarizing materials after declining to join a joint defense agreement. Critically, the Newegg case hinged on the fact that the attorney copied from a draft brief that hadn’t entered public record, which potentially sets it apart from the current case.
Nonetheless, this incident raises crucial questions about imitation in legal and academic contexts and how much recognition original authors should get if their work is reused. Clarity on these issues could significantly impact legal practice on the broader scale.
For more detailed coverage of the overall case, click here.