Boutique Sues Winston & Strawn For Violating ‘Copyright’ In Rule 12 Brief

// “As an attorney, plagiarism is your friend.” A senior partner delivered that message to my class of incoming associates in our first few weeks on the job. After years and years of being taught to fear plagiarism as an academic crime, the firm wanted to drill home that exercising originality in word choice is often damn near malpractice.

In a common law system, copying what’s worked before is sort of the whole point.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

IP boutique Hsuanyeh Law Group sued Winston & Strawn this week alleging a copyright violation over a brief.

Sponsored How to Achieve Quicker, More Valuable Case Settlements with Minimal Effort: A Guide for Personal Injury Lawyers We’re pleased to share the “Top 5 Things Carriers Are Looking for in Demands” — a guide authored by a lawyer with deep experience on… From EvenUp and Above The Law  

Advertising attorney Rob Freund flagged the suit on social media.

BigLaw firm Winston & Strawn was sued today for allegedly plagiarizing another firm's Rule 12 motion.

Hsuanyeh Law Group registered one of its Rule 12 motions with the Copyright Office and says Winston copied it "nearly verbatim" in a consolidated case. pic.twitter.com/xnzuFTL3jf

— Rob Freund (@RobertFreundLaw) December 28, 2023

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

Hsuanyeh and Winston both represented parties in patent infringement actions against the same actor in the Eastern District of Texas. Hsuanyeh filed a Rule 12 motion on August 23. On August 24, Winston filed a Rule 12 motion on behalf of its client echoing the Hsuanyeh motion. Hsuanyeh then ran to secure a copyright registration on August 30 and now demands statutory damages.

The cases cited by Hsuanyeh are… suspect. White v. West DOES say that briefs can be subject to copyright, but it’s about Westlaw publishing — and therefore profiting off — publicly filed legal briefs. Nothing about the logic of the case would carry over to filing a copycat brief. Moreover, the White court concluded that while briefs are theoretically copyrightable, publishing them on Westlaw amounted to fair use, so even in that extreme circumstance the authoring lawyers had no copyright case.

Sponsored Sponsored How to Achieve Quicker, More Valuable Case Settlements with Minimal Effort: A Guide for Personal Injury Lawyers We’re pleased to share the “Top 5 Things Carriers Are Looking for in Demands” — a guide authored by a lawyer with deep experience on… From EvenUp and Above The Law   Sponsored InterAction+ Brings Power Of CRM Software To Law Firms Of All Sizes The only legal CRM with exclusive content from LexisNexis®. From LexisNexis® InterAction+™   Sponsored The Smartfirm Playbook - Thriving In Today’s Legal Landscape Strategically using software and automation to boost efficiency and streamline operations, allowing for a laser-focus on practicing law. From Lawmatics   Sponsored The Smartfirm Playbook - Thriving In Today’s Legal Landscape Strategically using software and automation to boost efficiency and streamline operations, allowing for a laser-focus on practicing law. From Lawmatics  

Newegg is closer, involving attorneys in the same matter where the defendant lawyer ripped off materials after declining to join a joint defense agreement and therefore stealing the work without contributing to the preparation costs.

Except the crucial distinction in Newegg is that the lawyer lifted from a draft brief. Had the work product already entered the public record, it’s hard to imagine the same outcome. The facts are so specific that the attorney in Newegg is on record that “I offered someone a steak dinner if this case was ever cited or helped make anyone any money.”

But all that aside… why? What skin is it off Hsuanyeh’s noses? It’s not like they can charge Winston’s client for the work. If Winston billed its client for writing a whole brief when it just copied from another successful motion in the same court that would raise ethical issues, but copying a brief to save the client money is just good representation. Does Hsuanyeh want the recognition so prospective clients know they did the heavy lifting here? That’s a fair request, but not a reason to let law firms copyright briefs. Because where does that end? Winston may be a goliath here, but the more common application of a brief copyrighting regime will be big dogs beating up on small firms and struggling pro se litigants.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

Hopefully, Newegg’s lawyer will never have to lay out for that steak dinner.

Sponsored Sponsored How Generative AI Is Disrupting Law Firm Billing Practices Amid legal landscape shifts, billing practices remain vital. With generative AI enabling faster, more efficient work, some law firms may adjust billing models accordingly. From LexisNexis   Sponsored LawPay Pro Offers Upgraded Time And Billing Essentials AffiniPay’s latest product for the legal community, introduced earlier this year, presents a simple web-based solution for attorneys seeking seamless firm cash flow. From Above the Law  

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

1 2Next » Topics

Biglaw, Copyright, Hsuanyeh Law Group, Intellectual Property, Winston & Strawn