Opinion
21-cv-01752-CRB
06-27-2022
ELIAS KIFLE, Plaintiff, v. YOUTUBE LLC, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES
CHARLES R. BREYER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defendant YouTube, Inc. moves for attorneys' fees for half of its costs defending against pro se Plaintiff Elias Kifle's TRO motions. Mot. for Attorneys' Fees (dkt. 90); see TRO Mot. (dkt. 11); Amend. TRO Mot. (dkt. 31).
In a copyright action, a court has discretion to “award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs.” 17 U.S.C. § 505; see Historical Research v. Cabral, 80 F.3d 377, 378-79 (9th Cir. 1996) (courts may award fees if appropriate “to promote the Copyright Act's objectives”). The Court considers: “(1) the degree of success obtained; (2) frivolousness; (3) motivation; (4) the objective unreasonableness of the losing party's factual and legal arguments; and (5) the need, in particular circumstances, to advance considerations of compensation and deterrence.” Love v. Associated Newspapers, Ltd., 611 F.3d 601, 614-15 (9th Cir. 2010).
The Court DENIES YouTube's motion. Although Kifle's copyright claim was unsuccessful, it was not frivolous, he did not bring it with malicious intentions, and the circumstances here do not merit fees on compensation or deterrence grounds.
IT IS SO ORDERED.