Copyright Infringement. United Fabrics International, Inc., purchased a fabric design from an Italian design house, Contromoda, and registered a copyright to the design with the U.S. Copyright Office. When Macy's, Inc., began selling garments with a similar design, United filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Macy's and others.
In its defense, Macy's claimed that United did not own a valid copyright to the design. Ownership of a copyright is a requirement to establish an infringement claim.
The district court held that the evidence was insufficient to establish United's ownership of the design and, for that reason, dismissed the action. United appealed, arguing that its copyright in the design should be presumptively valid because the copyright had been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. How should the federal appellate court rule?
Should the owner of a registered copyright have to prove that the copyright is valid to establish infringement? Or, should the party contesting the validity of a copyright have to show that it is invalid? Explain your answer