Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-915_pol1.pdf
Page Number: 5

2 

UNICOLORS, INC. v. H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, L. P. 

Opinion of the Court 

of registration is valid 

“regardless of whether the certificate contains any in-
accurate information, unless— 
  “(A) the inaccurate information was included on the 
application  for  copyright  registration  with  knowledge 
that it was inaccurate; and 
  “(B)  the  inaccuracy  of  the  information,  if  known, 
would have caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse 
registration.”  §411(b)(1) (emphasis added). 

The important point for our purposes is that a certificate of 
registration is valid even though it contains inaccurate in-
formation,  as 
lacked 
long  as  the  copyright  holder 
“knowledge that it was inaccurate.”  §411(b)(1)(A). 
  The question before us concerns the scope of the phrase 
“with knowledge that it was inaccurate.”  The Court of Ap-
peals for the Ninth Circuit believed that a copyright holder 
cannot benefit from the safe harbor and save its copyright 
registration from invalidation if its lack of knowledge stems 
from a failure to understand the law rather than a failure 
to understand the facts.  In our view, however, §411(b) does 
not distinguish between a mistake of law and a mistake of 
fact.  Lack of knowledge of either fact or law can excuse an 
inaccuracy in a copyright registration.  We therefore vacate 
the Court of Appeals’ contrary holding. 

I 
  The  petitioner  here, Unicolors,  owns  copyrights  in  vari-
ous  fabric  designs.    App.  50–51.    It  sued  the  respondent, 
H&M  Hennes  &  Mauritz,  L.P.  (H&M),  for  copyright  in-
fringement.    959  F. 3d  1194,  1195  (CA9  2020).    The  jury 
found in Unicolors’ favor, but H&M asked the trial court to 
grant  it  judgment  as  a  matter  of  law.    Id.,  at  1196–1197.  
H&M argued, among other things, that Unicolors’ registra-
tion  certificate  was  invalid  (and  that  therefore  Unicolors