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

As concerns around the little-known litigation tool increase, practitioners say they are educating their clients on how it can be most effective
Kilburn & Strode and Mewburn Ellis are just two firms that have invested heavily in office space – a sign that the legal industry is serious about in-person working
In major recent developments, Dyson snagged another win against Hong Kong-based competitor Dreame and a new AI-powered UPC platform was launched
Mohit and Sidhant Goel decided not to pursue an interim injunction application so that their client, Communications Components Antenna, could benefit from a fast-track trial
Anita Cade, head of Ashurst’s IP and media team in Australia, discusses why law firms that can pull together capability across different practice areas and jurisdictions stand to gain
INTA’s CEO says London-based firms have registered fewer delegates compared to past meetings in San Diego and Atlanta, and questions the 'ethics' of trying to participate without registering
Lobbies and interest groups are among the interveners in a major dispute over whether courts can set patent pool rates
Benoit Geurts and Coreena Brinck will help the firm ‘accelerate its innovation agenda’, according to its managing partner
News of a trademark row over Taylor Swift’s ‘The Life of a Showgirl’ and Nokia’s expansion of its IoT licensing programme were also among the top talking points
IP attorneys share how the Cox v Sony ruling impacts their counselling strategies, and if the case could influence how courts may assess liability for AI platforms
Gift this article