US judge orders trial in dancing baby case

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US judge orders trial in dancing baby case

A judge has ordered a full trial will be held over the now-renowned video of a baby dancing to a Prince song on YouTube, in a case which may help to define the limits of US copyright law

Stephanie Lenz posted the 29-second clip of her son dancing to the song Let's Go Crazy by Prince &The Revolution to YouTube in 2007. YouTube removed the recording after Universal Music issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) notice, claiming Lenz violated its copyright on the song.

Lenz, with help from public interest organisation the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), later sued Universal under DMCA section 512(f) for failing to consider fair use.

dancing20baby.jpg

Last week, US District Judge Jeremy Fogel rejected arguments from both sides for summary judgment, ruling that a trial is needed to resolve disputed facts in the case.

Among other things, the court will consider whether Universal’s actions meet the high standard of subjective faith. Lenz argues that Universal’s screening process was so deficient that it demonstrated wilful blindness to whether the video fell under fair use exemptions.

Universal argues that the DMCA should not apply in this case, despite having sent the takedown notice pursuant to the DMCA. The company claims it only used DMCA procedures because YouTube's terms of service required as much to remove videos. 

Universal also argues that YouTube is ineligible for the safe harbour provision of the DMCA because hosting videos does not constitute “storage at the discretion of the user” as defined in Section 512.

The case, Lenz v Universal, is being tried in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose. Universal is being represented by Kelly Klaus of Munger Tolles & Olson; Lenz is being represented by Cindy Cohn of EFF and Ashok Ramani of Keker & Van Nest.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Mine Güner discusses bridging law and business, taking the initiative, and why Taylor Swift helped put copyright on the map
Cindy Goh discusses why she launched Cheang & Ariff's IP department, the improving litigation environment in Malaysia and what to consider when using AI
Increased focus on adding patent litigation depth to the firm’s Dallas office was behind the boutique’s most recent hires
IPH's Canadian acquisitions are paying off on paper, but a couple of strong years may not be enough to show that the group's strategy has truly won over the market
Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Firms with established sports relationships and specialised expertise are well positioned to capture the market’s expanded pool of IP work
Gunjan Paharia discusses developing RIA, an AI platform built to draw on decades of institutional knowledge, support junior lawyers, and reshape how legal teams work
A strong Canadian business helped lift profits, but the IP service group's latest results underline the pressure facing its operations in Australia, New Zealand and parts of Asia
Wins in court have been key to the six-year-old firm’s growth, as one of its founders explains
Gift this article