Is the Supreme Court breathtakingly dishonest or just completely clueless?

"An artistic feature of the design of a useful article is eligible for copyright protection if the feature (1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article and (2) would qualify as a protectable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work either on its own or in some other medium if imagined separately from the useful article."

"Consideration of [separability] test is unwarranted because the designs at issue are not designs of useful articles. Instead, the designs are themselves copyrightable pictorial or graphic works reproduced on useful articles."

In Star Athletica LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court resolved conflicting interpretations among Circuit Courts regarding conceptual separability in copyright law. The case examined whether cheerleader uniform designs could receive copyright protection separately from the uniforms themselves, which are not copyrightable as useful articles. Justice Thomas's majority opinion established that artistic features qualify for copyright protection if they can be perceived as independent two- or three-dimensional art and would be protectable as pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works if imagined separately. The Court affirmed the Sixth Circuit's decision protecting the uniform designs. Justice Ginsburg concurred in the outcome but argued the separability test was unnecessary, contending the designs were independently copyrightable works reproduced on useful articles rather than designs of useful articles themselves.

Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law