Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

Thompson Hine partner Jesse L. Jenike-Godshalk’s article “Justices’ Ruling On Inadvertent Error Excuse May Be Limited” was published in <em>Law360</em>.

contentpilot/introduction

The article discusses&nbsp;<em>Unicolors Inc. v. H&amp;M Hennes &amp; Mauritz LP,</em> in which the Supreme Court construed a safe harbor provision in the Copyright Act&nbsp;and concluded that a copyright registration containing incorrect information is not invalid even if the inaccuracy was due to ignorance or a mistake of law. On its face, this decision appears to be at odds with the maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

core/paragraph

The court's decision might be viewed as a broad abandonment of the maxim, but a more likely conclusion is that the court decided only that the maxim does not apply in the specific context presented in the case. At the same time, the court did not resolve the circuit split that brought Unicolors before it in the first place, and lower courts may find support in the opinion for either side of that split.