LIVE365, Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Board, et al., 09-cv-01662-RBW (D.C. Cir. 2009)

On August 29, internet broadcaster LIVE365 filed a complaint in the D.C. Circuit arguing that the appointment of the Copyright Royalty Board transgresses the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The complaint prayed for an injunction staying all proceedings before the CRB and a declaratory judgment. LIVE365 argued that:

(i) the Copyright Royalty Judges are principal officers who must be appointed by the President of the United States because they are not removable at will and their decisions are not reversible by the Librarian of Congress or any other Executive Branch official, or in the alternative, (ii) the Copyright Royalty Judges are inferior officers who must be appointed, inter alia, by a Head of Department, and the Librarian of Congress, as a member of the Legislative Branch, is not a Head of Department.

Previous posts at Exclusive Rights on an Appointments Clause challenge to the Copyright Royalty Board:

• Filings from D.C. Court of Appeals review of Copyright Royalty Board order (March 24, 2009)
  
• Royalty Logic’s Appointments Clause challenge of the Copyright Royalty Judges (March 31, 2009)
  
• Supreme Court to hear Appointments Clause challenge; Ramifications for the Copyright Royalty Board litigation (May 19, 2009)
• Breaking News: Every pending copyright case lacks jurisdiction (May 20, 2009)
• Supreme Court docket roundup of copyright cases (June 30, 2009)