Intellectual Property

Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc. — Study Notes

580 U.S. ___ (2017)

Study notes for Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

Design elements of a useful article can be copyrightable if they are separable from the functional aspects of the article.
Professor Notes

In Star Athletica, the Supreme Court addressed the critical question of whether design elements incorporated into useful articles, like cheerleading uniforms, could be copyright protected as works of art. The decision hinged on the concept of separability, which refers to the ability to separate artistic elements from the useful functions of the articles. The Court emphasized the need to focus not just on the functionality of the article, but rather on whether the design elements could exist independently as artistic expression. Professors may stress the implications this case has for future copyright claims in fashion and other industries that utilize design elements within functional items.

Moreover, the ruling underscored the importance of visual art in the context of copyright protection, asserting that artistic elements must be recognized for their standalone value. This case serves as a benchmark for assessing artistic works and could lead to increased protections for designers operating in markets blurred by the utility of their creations. It's pivotal for law students to grasp how this decision may influence both artistic expression and industry practices moving forward.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1Explain the separability test as articulated by the Supreme Court in this case.
  2. 2What factors determine whether artistic elements are copyrightable in useful articles?
  3. 3Discuss how the ruling in Star Athletica impacts future cases regarding design copyright.
  4. 4Are all design elements of a useful article automatically non-copyrightable? Why or why not?
  5. 5What implications does this ruling have for the fashion and design industries?
  6. 6How do previous copyright cases inform the Court's decision in Star Athletica?
  7. 7What legislative or policy responses might arise from the Court's decision?
Mnemonic Device

Design Elements Are Art (DEAA) - Remember that design aspects can be copyright protected if separable from functionality.

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
Mazer v. SteinMazer involved the copyrightability of artistic sculptures in lamp designs, which focused less on separability in the modern context of the Supreme Court's decision in Star Athletica.
Brandir International, Inc. v. Cascade Pacific Lumber Co.In Brandir, the court found elements as functional and not eligible for copyright. Star Athletica distinguished itself by stressing visual art's separability criteria.
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. SaronyBurrow-Giles discussed photographic works but did not delve into functionality issues, while Star Athletica specifically addresses the overlap between art and function.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Allowing copyright protection for design elements encourages creativity and investments in fashion, supporting the artistic expression inherent in design.

Against the Rule

Broadening copyright protections risks stifling competition and innovation in industries reliant on design, leading to fewer choices for consumers.

Class Discussion Points
  • The impact of copyright protections on the fashion industry compared to other creative industries.
  • How can the separability test be applied to technology or product design?
  • Potential changes to future copyright legislation based on the implications of this case.
Exam Angle

This case is likely to be tested regarding the interpretation of copyright law as it applies to the separability test for artistic elements in functional designs. Expect to analyze hypothetical scenarios involving useful articles and the applicability of copyright protections.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.