Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-571_e29f.pdf
Page Number: 5

2 

FOURTH ESTATE PUB. BENEFIT CORP. v. 
WALL-STREET.COM, LLC 
Opinion of the Court 

respondent  Wall-Street.com,  LLC  (Wall-Street),  a  news
website.  The  license  agreement  required  Wall-Street  to
remove  from  its  website  all  content  produced  by  Fourth
Estate  before  canceling  the  agreement.  Wall-Street  can-
celed, but continued to display articles produced by Fourth 
Estate.  Fourth  Estate  sued  Wall-Street  and  its  owner, 
Jerrold  Burden,  for  copyright  infringement.    The  com-
plaint alleged that Fourth Estate had filed “applications to 
register  [the]  articles  [licensed  to  Wall-Street]  with  the 
Register  of  Copyrights.”    App.  to  Pet.  for  Cert.  18a.1 
Because the Register had not yet acted on Fourth Estate’s 
applications,2  the  District  Court,  on  Wall-Street  and  Bur-
den’s  motion,  dismissed  the  complaint,  and  the  Eleventh 
Circuit  affirmed.    856  F. 3d  1338  (2017).    Thereafter,  the 
Register  of  Copyrights  refused  registration  of  the  articles
Wall-Street had allegedly infringed.3 

We  granted  Fourth  Estate’s  petition  for  certiorari  to 
resolve  a  division  among  U. S.  Courts  of  Appeals  on 
when registration occurs in accordance with §411(a).  585 
U. S. ___  (2018).    Compare, e.g.,  856  F. 3d,  at  1341  (case 
below)  (registration  has  been  made  under  §411(a)  when 
the  Register  of  Copyrights  registers  a  copyright),  with, 
e.g., Cosmetic Ideas, Inc. v. IAC/Interactivecorp, 606 F. 3d 
612,  621  (CA9  2010)  (registration  has  been  made  under 
§411(a)  when  the  copyright  claimant’s  “complete  applica-
tion” for registration is received by the Copyright Office). 

—————— 

1 The Register of Copyrights is the “director of the Copyright Office of
the Library of Congress” and is appointed by the Librarian of Congress. 
17  U. S. C.  §701(a).    The  Copyright Act  delegates  to  the  Register  “[a]ll
administrative functions and duties under [Title 17].”  Ibid. 

2 Consideration  of  Fourth  Estate’s  filings  was  initially  delayed  be-
cause  the  check  Fourth  Estate  sent  in  payment  of  the  filing  fee  was 
rejected  by  Fourth  Estate’s  bank  as  uncollectible.  App.  to  Brief  for 
United States as Amicus Curiae 1a. 

3 The  merits  of  the  Copyright  Office’s  decision  refusing  registration 

are not at issue in this Court.