Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega, S. A. | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued November 8, 2010 Decided December 13, 2010 | |
Full case name | Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Omega, S. A. |
Citations | 562 U.S. 40 (more) 131 S. Ct. 565; 178 L. Ed. 2d 470; 96 U.S.P.Q.2d 2025 |
Decision | [The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. Opinion] |
Case history | |
Prior | 541 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2008); cert. granted, 559 U.S. 1066 (2010). |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Per curiam | |
Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
Copyright Act of 1976 |
Omega S. A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp. | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
Full case name | Omega S. A. v. Costco Wholesale Corporation |
Decided | September 3, 2008 |
Citation | 541 F.3d 982 |
Case history | |
Prior action | Appeal from C.D. Cal. (2007 WL 7029735) |
Subsequent actions | Affirmed by an equally divided Supreme Court, No. 08-1423, 562 U.S. 40 (2010). |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Barry G. Silverman, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Milan D. Smith, Jr. |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Smith, joined by Rawlinson, Silverman |
Omega S. A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 541 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2008), was a case decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that held that in copyright law, the first-sale doctrine does not act as a defense to claims of infringing distribution and importation for unauthorized sale of authentic, imported watches that bore a design registered in the Copyright Office.[1] It is contrasted with Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.[2]