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

The new partners add patent trial depth in high-value technology sectors including semiconductors, software, and cloud computing
From seller vetting and proprietary screening technology to brand collaboration and industry partnerships, Temu explains how its intellectual property enforcement programme combats infringement on its marketplace
A handful of US firms have quietly invested in European patent talent. Recent moves by Baker Botts and K&L Gates suggest that trend may be accelerating
Loke Khoon Tan and Stephanie Yip at Dentons explain what brand owners need to know ahead of January 1 2027, when updates to China’s Trade Mark Law come into force
New US bills signal that firms should work with clients to ensure they are complying with potential regulatory requirements
Octavio Espejo of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains how sweeping patent reforms reshape filing strategies, prosecution, and divisional application practice
The UK Supreme Court’s decision in Tesla v Avanci enhances the UK's attractiveness for global FRAND battles, say lawyers at Simmons & Simmons
PE-backed practices now comprise the majority of ranked firms for patent prosecution in the Netherlands, but competitors are confident about their decision to remain independent
The firm says new additions position Brown Rudnick as a market leader in tech, life sciences, and global litigation
Richard Quatrano, counsel at Olshan Frome Wolosky, shares why technology M&A buyers and sellers must verify written IP assignments, as broken ownership chains can undermine valuation, deal terms, and closing certainty
Gift this article