SCOTUS recently held that the design of a cheerleading uniform is eligible for copyright protection
In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the design of a cheerleading uniform is eligible for copyright protection. As highlighted by the Court, its holding in Sitar Athletic° v. Varsity Brands “resolve[s] widespread disagreement over the proper test” for determining when “the design of a useful article is eligible for copyright protection.”
The Copyright Act of 1976 provides copyright protection for original works of art, but not for industrial designs. Under 17 U. S. C. $101, the “pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features” of the “design of a useful article” are eligible for copyright protection as artistic works if those features “can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.” Prior to the Court’s decision, the circuit courts of appeal could not agree what test should be used to analyze whether the designs on an article were separate from the functional aspects of the garment, known as “separability.”
Varsity Brands holds more than 200 copyright registrations for two-dimensional designs consisting of various lines, chevrons, and colorful shapes appearing on the surface of the cheerleading uniforms the company designs, makes and sells. Varsity Brands filed a copyright infringement suit against Star Athletica, which also markets cheerleading uniforms. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Star Athletica, ruling that the designs could not be conceptually or physically separated from the uniforms and were, therefore, ineligible for copyright protection. The Sixth Circuit reversed, holding that the graphics could be “identified separately” and were “capable of existing independently” of the uniforms under §101.
Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the Sixth Circuit’s decision. Under the Court’s two-part test to determine separability: “if the feature (1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article and (2) would qualify as a protectable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work either on its own or in some other medium if imagined separately from the useful article.”
When applying the above test to the uniforms at issue, the Court determined that the decorations were separable and, therefore, eligible for copyright protection. “First, the decorations can be identified as features having pictorial, graphic, or sculptural qualities,” Justice Clarence Thomas explained. “Second, if those decorations were separated from the uniforms and applied in another medium, they would qualify as two-dimensional works of art under §101.” He further added: “Imaginatively removing the decorations from the uniforms and applying them in another medium also would not replicate the uniform itself.”
While the Court’s decision established a bright line rule, Justice Thomas was careful to emphasize the limits of its holding. He wrote:
To be clear, the only feature of the cheerleading uniform eligible for a copyright, in this case, is the two-dimensional work of art…respondents have no right to prohibit any person from manufacturing a cheerleading uniform of identical shape, cut, and dimensions to the ones on which the decorations in this case appear. They may prohibit only the reproduction of the surface designs in any tangible medium of expression—a uniform or otherwise.
Implications for the Fashion Industry
The Court’s decision in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands brings much-needed clarity for copyright holders. It may also help businesses battle counterfeiters and others that seek to copy their clothing designs. To take full benefit of the Court’s holding, fashion companies should assess, with counsel, whether to pursue copyright registrations for their two- or three-dimensional clothing surface designs.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, David Einhorn, at 201-806-3364.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
SCOTUS Holds Cheerleading Uniform Design Is To Be Copyrightable
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
SCOTUS recently held that the design of a cheerleading uniform is eligible for copyright protection
In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the design of a cheerleading uniform is eligible for copyright protection. As highlighted by the Court, its holding in Sitar Athletic° v. Varsity Brands “resolve[s] widespread disagreement over the proper test” for determining when “the design of a useful article is eligible for copyright protection.”
The Copyright Act of 1976 provides copyright protection for original works of art, but not for industrial designs. Under 17 U. S. C. $101, the “pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features” of the “design of a useful article” are eligible for copyright protection as artistic works if those features “can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.” Prior to the Court’s decision, the circuit courts of appeal could not agree what test should be used to analyze whether the designs on an article were separate from the functional aspects of the garment, known as “separability.”
Varsity Brands holds more than 200 copyright registrations for two-dimensional designs consisting of various lines, chevrons, and colorful shapes appearing on the surface of the cheerleading uniforms the company designs, makes and sells. Varsity Brands filed a copyright infringement suit against Star Athletica, which also markets cheerleading uniforms. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of Star Athletica, ruling that the designs could not be conceptually or physically separated from the uniforms and were, therefore, ineligible for copyright protection. The Sixth Circuit reversed, holding that the graphics could be “identified separately” and were “capable of existing independently” of the uniforms under §101.
Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the Sixth Circuit’s decision. Under the Court’s two-part test to determine separability: “if the feature (1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article and (2) would qualify as a protectable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work either on its own or in some other medium if imagined separately from the useful article.”
When applying the above test to the uniforms at issue, the Court determined that the decorations were separable and, therefore, eligible for copyright protection. “First, the decorations can be identified as features having pictorial, graphic, or sculptural qualities,” Justice Clarence Thomas explained. “Second, if those decorations were separated from the uniforms and applied in another medium, they would qualify as two-dimensional works of art under §101.” He further added: “Imaginatively removing the decorations from the uniforms and applying them in another medium also would not replicate the uniform itself.”
While the Court’s decision established a bright line rule, Justice Thomas was careful to emphasize the limits of its holding. He wrote:
To be clear, the only feature of the cheerleading uniform eligible for a copyright, in this case, is the two-dimensional work of art…respondents have no right to prohibit any person from manufacturing a cheerleading uniform of identical shape, cut, and dimensions to the ones on which the decorations in this case appear. They may prohibit only the reproduction of the surface designs in any tangible medium of expression—a uniform or otherwise.
Implications for the Fashion Industry
The Court’s decision in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands brings much-needed clarity for copyright holders. It may also help businesses battle counterfeiters and others that seek to copy their clothing designs. To take full benefit of the Court’s holding, fashion companies should assess, with counsel, whether to pursue copyright registrations for their two- or three-dimensional clothing surface designs.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, David Einhorn, at 201-806-3364.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
