Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1501_8n5a.pdf
Page Number: 14

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

11 

Opinion of the Court 

788, 804 (1870); see also Livingston v. Woodworth, 15 How. 
546, 559–560 (1854) (restricting an accounting remedy “to
the actual gains and profits . . . during the time” the infring-
ing machine “was in operation and during no other period” 
to avoid “convert[ing] a court of equity into an instrument 
for  the  punishment  of  simple  torts”);  Seymour  v.  McCor-
mick, 16 How. 480, 490 (1854) (rejecting a blanket rule that
infringing one component of a machine warranted a remedy
measured by the full amounts of the profits earned from the 
machine); Mowry v. Whitney, 14 Wall. 620, 649 (1872) (va-
cating  an  accounting  that  exceeded  the  profits  from  in-
fringement alone); Wooden-Ware Co. v. United States, 106 
U. S. 432, 434–435 (1882) (explaining that an innocent tres-
passer is entitled to deduct labor costs from the gains ob-
tained by wrongfully harvesting lumber).

The Court has carved out an exception when the “entire
profit of a business or undertaking” results from the wrong-
ful  activity.  Root,  105  U. S.,  at  203.    In  such  cases,  the 
Court has explained, the defendant “will not be allowed to
diminish the show of profits by putting in unconscionable 
claims  for  personal  services  or  other  inequitable  deduc-
tions.”  Ibid.  In Goodyear, for example, the Court affirmed
an accounting order that refused to deduct expenses under 
this rule.  The Court there found that materials for which 
expenses were claimed were bought for the purposes of the 
infringement and “extraordinary salaries” appeared merely 
to be “dividends of profit under another name.”  9 Wall., at 
803;  see  also  Callaghan  v.  Myers,  128  U. S.  617,  663–664 
(1888) (declining to deduct a defendant’s personal and liv-
ing expenses from his profits from copyright violations, but
distinguishing  the  expenses  from  salaries  of  officers  in  a 
corporation).

Setting aside that circumstance, however, courts consist-
ently restricted awards to net profits from wrongdoing after
deducting  legitimate  expenses.    Such  remedies,  when  as-
sessed  against  only  culpable  actors  and  for  victims,  fall